Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs):

Technology for sustainable electricity, waste remediation, resource
recovery, chemical production and beyond
Suman Bajracharya a, b, 1, Mohita Sharma a, c, 1, Gunda Mohanakrishna a,
Xochitl Dominguez Benneton a, David P.B.T.B. Strik b, Priyangshu M. Sarma c,
Deepak Pant a, *
a
Separation & Conversion Technologies, VITO e Flemish Institute for Technological Research, Boeretang 200, 2400, Mol, Belgium
b
Sub-Department of Environmental Technology, Bornse Weilanden 9, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands
c
Environmental and Industrial Biotechnology Division, The Energy and Resource Institute (TERI), Darbari Seth Block, Habitat Place, Lodhi Road, New Delhi,
110003, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Bioelectrochemical systems (BESs) are unique systems capable of converting chemical energy into
Received 12 January 2016 electrical energy (and vice-versa) while employing microbes as catalysts. Such organic wastes including
Received in revised form low-strength wastewaters and lignocellulosic biomass were converted into electricity with microbial fuel
23 February 2016
cells (MFCs). Likewise, electrical energy was used to produce hydrogen in microbial electrolysis cells
Accepted 2 March 2016
Available online xxx
(MECs) or other products including caustic and peroxide. BES were also designed to recover nutrients,
metals or removal of recalcitrant compounds. Moreover, photosynthetic micro-organisms as well as
higher plants were implemented to use solar energy for electricity generation. The diversity on microbial
Keywords:
Recalcitrant removal
and enzymatic catalysts offered by nature allows a plurality of potential applications. As compared to
Microbial electrocatalysis conventional fuel cells, BESs operate under relatively mild conditions and do not use expensive precious
CO2 sequestration metals as catalysts. The recently discovered microbial electrosynthesis (MES) of high-value chemicals has
Biosensors greatly expanded the horizon for BES. Newer concepts in application as well as development of alter-
Value-added chemicals production native materials for electrodes, separators, catalysts along with innovative designs have made BES very
promising technology. This article discusses the recent developments that have been made in BESs so far,
with the emphasis on their various applications beyond electricity generation and resulting perfor-
mances as well as existing limitations.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction this context, the development of renewable energy sources has

There is a growing demand for new energy sources due to the
limited accessibility and pollution caused by the use of fossil fuels.
At present, the annual energy demand is approximately 13
terrawatts (TW) worldwide and it is estimated to reach around
23 TW by the year 2050 [15]. Meanwhile, intensive resource utili-
zation in municipal, industrial and agricultural activities will
continue the process of environmental degradation creating envi-
ronmental threats of global warming and related consequences. In
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: deepak.pant@vito.be, pantonline@gmail.com (D. Pant).
1
Equal contribution.
become crucial for a sustainable landscape, especially by
decreasing the dependency on energy import and by diversifying
energy production sources [147]. Bioelectrochemical systems
(BESs) have considerably boomed over the past decade for their
contribution as an emerging sustainable technology for concurrent
electricity production and wastewater treatment [122]. In addition,
BESs also offer unique possibilities for clean and efficient produc-
tion of fuels and high-value chemicals using microorganisms [48].
As the BES functions in a completely multi-disciplinary approach, a
large quantum of research have been conducted worldwide in the
fields of microbiology, electrochemistry, bioelectrochemistry,
biotechnology, environmental science, materials science, etc. In
these electrochemical systems, the redox potentials of an oxidation
reaction at the anode and a reduction reaction at the cathode create

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.002
0960-1481/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
2 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
a potential difference which is the driving force for electrons to flow
from a low potential to high potential, spontaneously [137]. This
flow of electrons through an external circuit is measured as electric
current. Whenever, microbes or enzymes are involved in the
oxidation or reduction or both reactions, the system is termed as a
microbial electrochemical system (MXC) or in a broader term BES
[64]. If microbes catalyze the anodic reaction, they are applied as
bioanode and if microbes catalyze the cathodic reactions, they are
applied as biocathode. Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) are a type of MXC
that generate electricity from the degradation of organic matter in
anode chamber. A low redox potential for the oxidation of organic
matter at the anode and a high redox potential for the oxygen
reduction reaction (ORR) at the cathode, typically results into
bioelectricity generation. In the case of microbial electrolysis cells
(MECs), an external voltage is applied to subject the cathode po-
tentials driving the production of valuable chemicals [169]. The BES
in which CO2 or organic molecules are cathodically reduced to
higher value organic molecules is called microbial electrosynthesis
(MES) [144]. In addition, BESs have also emerged with other ap-
plications such as microbial desalination cells (MDCs) for the
desalination of water, and sediment or plant microbial fuel
cellsdwherein microbes are intermingled with plant roots for the
electricity generation [12,27,47]. Moreover, BESs are also identified
as efficient bioreactors for the treatment of recalcitrant pollutants
and toxic wastewaters; the process is termed as bioelectrochemical
treatment (BET) or microbial electroremediation [124].
In this direction, the present review provides the overview of (i)
all types of BESs and their applications, (ii) the basic working
principles involved, (iii) substrate utilization, (iv) synthesis of tar-
geted chemicals and (v) the recent concepts and developments
made in BES. This review emphasizes the recent advances in BES
that were developed beyond electricity generation. This review also
helps to attract the young researchers from the allied disciplines of
BES to advance the technology with multiple applications.
2. Types of bioelectrochemical systems
Based on the desired end objectives, BESs can be broadly clas-
sified into electrogenesis systems, electrohydrogenesis systems,
microbial desalination systems, microbial electrosynthesis systems
and bioelectrochemical treatment systems. Each type of BES with
specific names as shown in Fig. 1 are discussed in the following
sections.
2.1. Microbial fuel cells (MFCs)
MFCs harness electrical current from the microbial oxidation of
organic matter using a solid electrode as an electron acceptor [143].
The anode surface of MFCs facilitates microbial attachment and
oxidation of organics, thereby generating electrons which are then
simultaneously transferred to the cathode compartment via an
external circuit containing an external load. Electroneutrality is
warranted by ions transport through an ion-permeable medium or
a membrane while electricity is produced in the process. The first of
such systems was demonstrated by M.C. Potter in 1911, which
achieved a maximum voltage of 0.3e0.5 V [140]. Electroactive
bacterial biofilms developed on the anode of BES function as the
electrocatalytic unit for electricity generation. Production of
bioelectricity in MFC is directly dependent on the capacity of
exoelectrogens (microbes generating electricity) present on the
anode, which facilitate the transfer of electrons from the reduced
substrate to the anode. Oxidation of complex organic matter in
wastewater requires diverse microbial communities. Dozens of
bacterial species have been found of being able to produce electric
current. The Shewanella and Geobacter species were earlier
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
identified as the electron-transferring microbes and as such well-
studied. However, stable and higher currents have been recorded
more often in MFCs with mixed cultures in bioanodes, rather than
with pure cultures. The presence of Geobacteraceae in the bioanode
community often showed high power densities registered in MFCs
[86,101]. The highest current density reported so far in MFC was
390 A m
2 obtained using mixed culture at the layered-corrugated
carbon anode with high surface area [19]. The nature of substrate,
anode potential and electrolyte chemistry affect the microbial ac-
tivity and electron transfer [52,134]. Higher electrolyte conductivity
ascertains the better performance of microbial electrochemical
systems but the electrolyte conductivity should not go beyond the
tolerance level of bacteria [168]. However, it was identified that the
application of halophilic bacteria in BESs have reported to produce
the current densities up to 85 A m
2 with bioanodes formed from a
salt-marsh inoculum and cultivated in a 1.5 times more saline
electrolyte than seawater [151]. Significant current densities and
power densities obtained from MFCs, as reported in various studies,
are listed in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. The performance of MFCs
also relies on the electrode material used and its structure. Graphite
electrodes with a roughened surface have shown to produce higher
power densities than flat graphite electrodes [189]. Likewise,
increasing the surface area of MFC anodes using porous materials
such as graphite brush, carbon felt and carbon nanotubes, have
shown considerable increase in current density [20,53,123]. Higher
surface area of electrodes provides a larger surface for bacterial
adhesion and electron transfer between the bacteria and electrode,
thereby demonstrating noteworthy improvement in current den-
sities. Direct electron transfer phenomenon of microbes with metal
electrodes has also been demonstrated including dimensionally
stable anodes (DSA, titanium over iridium and tantalum oxide),
stainless steel and platinum electrodes [44,139]. Current densities
obtained with porous carbon anodes are typically higher than those
reported with metals except for platinum [217]. A switch from
planar electrodes to three-dimensional electrodesdhaving opti-
mized microstructuresdwas correlated to a considerable increase
on bioelectrode performance [167]. Macrostructure modification in
anode, with multi-layered corrugated carbon configuration evi-
denced a huge rise in current densities [19]. Especially once mass
transport limitations are tackled by flow-through electrodes,
higher current and power densities can be achieved as a result of
low internal resistances [170]. The relevance of cathode materials in
the power densities obtained from MFCs is demonstrated in Table 2
based on the MFC studies reporting similar anode materials. Cata-
lysts e.g. MnO2 coated air cathodes and membrane and cloth
electrode assemblies as cathode in MFCs reported higher power
densities. Materials used for MFC construction, design and config-
uration influence the internal resistance, which in turn govern the
total performance of the system.
2.2. Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs)
MECs utilize the property of bacteria to convert chemical energy
to electrical energy and allow electrolysis of water [194]. External
power applied onto the electrical circuit of BES drives electrons
from anode to the cathode and also supports the hydrogen gener-
ation at the cathode [78]. Contrary to the MFCs, the cathode of
MECs operates under anaerobic conditions that facilitate hydrogen
production. However the anoxic environment in MECs, along with
high concentrations of hydrogen production, can also promote
methane production once CO2 and methanogens are available. A
few of the methods to mitigate methane production includes the
aeration of the cathode chamber between batches, lowering of the
pH, operation at short retention times and giving a heat shock to
the inoculum, or adding chemicals that inhibit the growth of
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18 3

Fig. 1. Schematic overview of various types of bioelectrochemical systems (BESs).

methanogens [23]. Hydrogen production in MECs, according to
their configurations and the substrates treated, are listed in Table 3.
Higher electric currents are typically observed in MECs, when
compared to MFCs, which is due to the additional applied voltage
that helps overcoming the cathode limitations in MEC [170]. The
energy required for MEC operation can also be provided by another
separate MFC as a power source [198]. This study reported a
hydrogen production rate of 0.24 m3-H2 m
3d
1 and energy re-
covery of 23% using a fermentation effluent as substrate. However,
for the supply of a stipulated voltage that allows for maximal
hydrogen production in MEC, efficiently connected multiple MFCs
are required [198]. In a MEC with bioanode and biocathode,
expensive metals like platinum are not required as catalyst and
preferably, the enrichment of microbes on the carbon cathode de-
creases the start-up time and produces comparable current den-
sities to those of bioanode [78]. Furthermore, the hydrogen
synthesized in MECs can also drive the biochemical production of
other chemicals [144]. Most common examples of reduction re-
actions at the cathode are proton reduction to hydrogen, oxygen
reduction to H2O2 and CO2 reduction to methane (CH4) and acetate
[23,26,158]. These recently developed BESs for the production of
valuable chemicals and biofuels such as organic acids, or alcohols
from low value compounds or CO2 [125,130,166] are deliberated in
the next section.
cathode. Cathodic biocatalysts (with attached cathodic biofilms)
reduce the available terminal electron acceptor to produce value
added products [112,125,144]. The bioelectrosynthesis process can
be highly specific, depending on the biocatalyst catalyzing the
redox reaction and the terminal electron acceptor involved in the
process, along with the electrochemically active redox mediators or
suitable reducing equivalents. Biocathodes are the key components
of microbial electrosynthesis, where the electrode oxidizing mi-
croorganisms are involved in the formation of reduced value-added
product such as acetate, ethanol, butyrate [6]. MES refers to the
production of chemical compounds in an electrochemical cell by
electricity-driven CO2 reduction as well as reduction/oxidation of
other organic feedstocks using microbes as biocatalyst [144]. As a
proof of concept [130] presented MES as a microbial catalysis of CO2
reduction to multi-carbon organic compounds using electrical
current at the cathode. As such, MES is also prospected as an
alternative strategy to capture electrical energy in covalent chem-
ical bonds of organic products. Several studies have reviewed and
highlighted different aspects of MES including microbiology,
technology and economics, as well as deep understanding on the
metabolic routes involved, electron transfer mechanisms and
practical considerations [41,143,144].
2.4. Enzymatic fuel cells (EFCs)

2.3. Microbial electrosynthesis (MES)
MES, also known as bioelectrosynthesis, is a new-fangled
perspective of BES which utilizes the reducing power generated
from the anodic oxidation to produce value added products at the
Enzymatic fuel cells (EFCs) make use of specific enzymes on the
electrode surface (or in electrolyte suspension) that facilitate the
catalytic oxidation of fuel and drive specific reactions desired for
various applications. Davis & Yabrough [37] demonstrated the use
of microbes and enzymes in biofuel cells using glucose oxidase.

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
4 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

Table 1
Overview of current densities reported in MFCs in connection to the type of microbial culture used and anode material.

Source inoculum Type of MFC and anode material/specifications Current density (A m
2) Reference

Geobacter spp. Two chamber/graphite sticks 0.065 [10]

Geobacter spp. Two chamber/graphite anodes at 0.2 V/AgAgCl 0.16e1.14 [10]
Anaerobic culture of Escherichia coli K12 Two-chambered MFC/platinum paddle electrodes (5 cm2) 5 [150]
and ethanol as substrate
Anaerobic culture of Escherichia coli K12 Two-chambered MFC/platinum paddle electrodes (5 cm2) 50 [150]
and formate as substrate
Pre-acclimated bacteria from MFC Cube shaped single-chamber MFC/graphite fiber brush 8 [100]
anode (7170 m2 m
3 brush volume)
Mixed culture 2.5 ml anode chamber, bicarbonate buffer/Double cloth 9.9 [51]
electrode assemblies (CEAs); (2  7 cm2 projected electrode area),
Klebsiella pneumonie L17 Two chamber/Carbon felt 1.2 [216]
Rhodopseudomonas palustris DX-1 Single chamber/graphite brush 9.9 [206]
Geobacter sulfurreducens Single chamber/DSA at 0.2 V/AgAgCl 5 [44]
Geobacter sulfurreducens Single chamber/solid graphite at 0.2 V/AgAgCl 8 [44]
Geobacter sulfurreducens Single chamber/multiple stainless steel anode at þ0.2 V/AgAgCl 2.4 [45]
Mixed culture Single chamber/Graphite plates projected surface area of 70 cm2 0.27 to 0.35 [124]
Mixed culture 3D carbon fiber anode prepared by gas assisted electrospining; 30 [20]
anode polarised at 0.2 V/AgAgCl
Mixed culture Half-cell semi batch reactor/Layered corrugated Carbon 70e400 [19]
anode/polarised at 0.2 V/AgAgCl
Mixed culture from air cathode MFC 30 ml anode chamber/Double cloth electrode assemblies 16.4 [50]
(CEAs); (2  100 cm2 projected area);
Geoalkalibacter subterraneus Planar graphite electrode poised at 0.2 V/SCE; Saline 4.68 ± 0.54 [14]
electrolyte 3.5% NaCl
Mixed culture 3D scaffold-NanoWeb reticulated vitreous carbon 68 ± 30 [54]
electrode at 0 V/AgAgCl
Garden compost Carbon cloth,
0.2 V/SCE 33.5 [85]
Garden compost Stainless steel foam at 0 V/SCE 100 [85]
Geobacteraceae dominated secondary Ag sheet anode at 0.2 V/AgAgCl 11 [9]
mixed culture from wastewater
Geobacteraceae dominated secondary Cu sheet anode at
0.2 V/AgAgCl 15 [9]
mixed culture from wastewater
Geobacter sulfurreducens Ice-templated titanium based ceramic anode, 88% porosity 128.7 [115]
Mixed culture Carbonized corn stem 31.2 [84]

DSA: Dimensionally stable anode.

SCE: Standard calomel electrode.

Glucose oxidase has been widely used in pacemakers, indicator
lights, small actuators, micro pumps, and other glucose electro-
oxidizing anode-based systems, because of its thermostability
and high selectivity [75]. Several enzymes are used on anode and
cathodes, based on their specific redox function. If highly selective
enzymes are used at the anode and cathode, this eliminates the
need of any membrane between the anode and cathode compart-
ments. However, enzymatic catalysts are usually reported to
oxidize the fuel partially and heat generation occurs as a result of
side reactions, which might be detrimental to the enzymatic ac-
tivity [118,132]. The shelf life of these enzyme-based systems has
been extended through encapsulation in micelle polymers that
provide a buffering capacity for pH control and a hydrophobic niche
to prevent enzymatic degradation [118]. The flavin adenine
dinucleotide-dependent glucose dehydrogenases (FADGDH)/
Osmium (Os)-polymer-based electrodes showed high sensitivity
towards glucose and also reported higher current densities, which
made them suitable for use as bioanodes in glucose based EFCs
[211]. The Pyrroquinolinequinone-dependent alcohol dehydroge-
nase (PQQ-ADH), enzyme originating from acetic acid bacteria, has
been reported for the development of EFCs and biosensors, as it can
undergo quasi-reversible electrochemistry at an exposed carbon
surface [59,207]). This enzyme was reported to be capable of using
different redox mediators and also has a good electron transfer
kinetics [207]. Higher energy densities in combination with lower
power outputs make EFCs suitable for independently powering the
wireless sensor applications such as video monitoring and also for
the development of other portable power devices [7,59]. The use of
FAD-dependent fructose dehydrogenase, obtained from Glucono-
bacter, as an anodic catalyst, and copper containing laccase from
mushrooms, have been evaluated as cathodes, showing a high
turnover rate, good stability and high selectivity [83,211]. Multi-
enzyme based EFCs are generally preferred over single enzyme
systems so as to increase the substrate conversion and the perfor-
mance of the system as a whole [118]. Many studies are now
focusing on cascade of enzymes in FECs to facilitate complex
mechanisms and 3-D electrode configurations to provide ample
surface area for enzymatic reactions. However, due to the utiliza-
tion of purified enzymes with catalytic capacity, the cost for EFCs
are still high.
2.5. Microbial solar cells (MSCs)
Microbial solar cells (MSCs) make use of photoautotrophic
microbes or higher plants to entrap solar energy which is further
utilized by electroactive bacteria to perform electrode-driven
reactions. These reactions include generation of electric current
or compounds like hydrogen, methane, ethanol, hydrogen
peroxide etc. Primarily photosynthesis leads to the generation of
organic compounds, which are subsequently fed into the anode
compartment where they are oxidized by electroactive microbes
to produce electrons. These electrons are then transferred to the
cathodic side where reduction of oxygen leads to the formation of
water [46]. The phototrophic biofilms developed on the anode
contain species of cyanophyta including Synechocystis, chlor-
ophyta and other electroactive microbes [182]. A system for
treatment of algal blooms in lakes has been reported based on
MSC principles, where algal biomass provided by Microcystis
aeruginosa and Chlorella vulgaris was fed as a substrate in MFCs
along with lake water, for concomitant power production and

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18 5

Table 2
An overview of power densities reported in MFCs in connection to cathode material.

MFC design Anode Cathode Maximum power Reference

density (mW m
2
projected cathode)

MFCs with carbon paper, carbon cloth and similar anodes

Single chamber
Dual chamber
Single chamber
Single chamber air-cathode
Miniatured tubular MFCs
MFCs with granular graphite and similar anodes
Open air biocathode with
tubular MFC configuration
Dual chamber
Dual chamber
Tubular air-chamber MFC
Tubular air-chamber MFC
Tubular air-chamber MFC
Two chambered MFC
MFCs with carbon and graphite brush anodes
Tubular cathode in single
chamber configuration
Single chamber MFC
Single chamber
Two chamber MFC
Single chamber MFC
Single chamber MFC
MFCs with carbon felt anodes
Two chamber upflow MFC
Tubular air-cathode MFC
Single chamber MFC
MFCs with graphene coated anodes
Two chamber MFC
Two-chamber MFC
Two-chamber MFC
Toray carbon paper (without MEA with Pt catalyst; PEM-carbon 262 ± 10 [94]
wet proofing; E-TEK) clothes assemblies
Plain carbon paper Aqueous air-cathode; Carbon paper 33 (anode area based) [102]
with platinum catalyst
Carbon cloth (type A, E-TEK) Air-cathode; Carbon clothes, PTFE 766 [24]
(diffusion layer)
Carbon cloth Double Cloth Electrode 4300 [50]
Assemblies (CEA)

3
Untreated carbon veil Air cathode; untreated carbon veil; 9.8 W m [203]

3
granular graphite Sludge biocathode; graphite 83 ± 11 W m [29]
felt with MnO2 total electrolyte
Graphite granules Aqueous air cathode without catalyst; 5.88 (nominal cathode [56]
granular graphite with nano pores surface area based)
Graphite granules Sludge biocathode; graphie fiber brush 68.4 W m
3 anolyte [210]
Graphite felt and graphite granules MEA; Canvas cloth with Ni and 86.03 [221]
MnO2 coating
Graphite felt and graphite granules MEA/Canvas cloth with graphite 24.67 [221]
and MnO2 coating
Graphite felt and graphite granules b-MnO2 catalyzed air cathode 172 ± 7 [215]
Carbon granules anode; acetate Activated nitrogen-doped 1377 ± 46 [208]
fed mixed culture carbon fiber cathode
Plain graphite fiber brush MEA/ultrafiltration membrane; 18 W m
3 [222]
graphite coating with CoTMPP catalyst total electrolyte
Graphite fiber brush MEA; Ion exchange membrane-graphite 449 ± 35 [223]
coating and CoTMPP catalyst; AEM
Graphite fiber brush treated Air cathode; stainless steel mesh 1610 ± 56 [213]
with ammonia gas and Nafion binder with diffusion layer

3
Carbon brush anode Crumpled graphene cathode 3.3 W m [205]
carbon fiber brush anode Goretex diffusion layered carbon 1330 ± 30 [108]
cloth cathode
carbon fiber brush anode; PTFE diffusion layered carbon 1390 ± 70 [108]
acetate fed mixed culture cloth cathode
Carbon felt Aqueous air cathode; activated 315 (cross-sectional [40]
carbon fiber felt area of separator)
Graphite felt A tubular air-cathode; non-Pt; 175.7 [220]
continuous MFC stack with
swine wastewater
carbon felt anode Manganese dioxideegraphene nano 2083 [201]
sheet (MnO2/GNS) air cathode
Crumpled graphene anode Carbon brush cathode; 3.6 W m
3 [205]
Graphene coated stainless with Carbon cloth cathode with 2143 [70]
steel fiber felt anode; Acetate ferricyanide catholyte
fed mixed culture
Graphene coated carbon cloth Carbon cloth cathode with 1018 [70]
anode (acetate fed mixed culture) ferricyanide catholyte

CoTMPP: Cobalt tetramethylphenylporphyrin.

MEA: Membrane electrode assembly.

water treatment [200]. The algal biomass from photo-
bioreactordafter the treatment in an anaerobic digester, can be
used as a feed for the fuel cell [38]. A MSC with a photobioreactor
using Chlorella at the anode, reached a light to electricity con-
version efficiency of 0.04% resulting in 14 mW m
2 of average
power density [182]. Without mediator or carbon source in the
anolyte, Synechocystis PCC6803 was reported to produce
539 mA m
2, under higher light intensity (10,000 lux) and
resulted on effective CO2 sequestration (625 mmol CO2 m
3)
[109]. Improvement of performance is possible by photo-
bioreactor optimization, improved chemical energy transfer from
algae to bioanode, higher surface electrode area and enriched
electroactive biofilm [181]. The advantages of this system lie on
simultaneous CO2 sequestration and direct conversion of light to
electricity [109].
2.6. Plant microbial fuel cells (PMFCs)
Plant microbial fuel cells (PMFCs) incorporate the living
plant's root system into the MFC anode so that the organic
products, called as rhizodeposits, released to the soil by the roots,
can be used as substrate for electricity production by electro-
active microbes [180]. Hence, in a broader sense, PMFCs harness
solar radiation by transforming it into green electricity in a clean
and efficient manner. The rhizodeposits from the roots mainly
comprise exudates (sugars, organic acids), secretions (polymeric
carbohydrates and enzymes), lysates (dead cell materials) and
gases [180]. The choice of a plant for PMFC is crucial, as it directly

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
6 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

Table 3
An overview of experimental conditions and performances of hydrogen producing MEC with mixed culture biocatalyst.

BES specifications and anode/cathode Hydrogen Current Electric Efficiencies and Reference
material production rate density energy input recovery in %
(m3 H2 m
3 d
1) (A m
2) (kWh m
3 H2)

A) Bioanode and abiotic cathode

Two chamber; Graphite felt anode; 0.1 0.447 NA 53 ± 3.5% overall efficiency [154]
TiePt cathode; 0.5 V applied voltage
Single chamber; Graphite brush anode; 3.12 11.6 NA 78% overall efficiency [11]
carbon cloth with Pt coating cathode;
0.8 V applied voltage
Two chamber; graphite felt forced flow 5.6 16.4 NA 43% overall, 71% [172]
through anode; PteTi mesh cathode; cathodic H2 recovery
1 V applied voltage
Cloth separator; carbon felt anode; 6.3 4.7 NA 90% COD recovery [188]
carbon cloth cathode with Pt coating;
1 V applied voltage
Two chamber; graphite felt; nickel foam; 50 22.8 2.62 90% cathodic H2 recovery [80]
1 V applied voltage
Single chambered cube MEC; Graphite 7.9 ± 0.3 33.28 4.7 ± 0.5 40 ± 1% overall efficiency [128]
brush anode at 0.2 V/AgAgCl; Pt coated
carbon cloth cathode
Single chambered cube MEC; graphite 6.9 ± 0.8 26.08 2.9 ± 0.4 54 ± 5% overall efficiency [128]
brush anode at 0 V/AgAgCl
Single chambered cube MEC;graphite brush 3.6 ± 0.6 14.6 2.3 ± 0.3 58 ± 6% overall efficiency [128]
anode at
0.2 V/AgAgCl
Single chamber; graphite fiber brush anode; 17. 8 26.14 NA ~80% overall efficiency, [25]
Pt coated carbon cloth; 1 V applied voltage 93% cathodic H2 recovery
Two chamber MEC with AEM; Carbon NA 10.2 2.62 90% cathodic H2 recovery [171]
felt anode; 1 V applied voltage
Wastewater feed 100 L reactor with 6 0.006 NA NA 48.7% energy recovery; [67]
MEC cassettes; 2 carbon felt anodes in 41.2% CE
each cassette; stainless steel wool cathode;
1.1 V applied voltage
Glycerol, milk and starch feed single chamber MEC; 0.94 150 A m
3 NA 91% cathodic H2 recovery [126]
graphite fiber brush anode; Pt coated graphite
fiber cloth cathode; 0.8 V applied voltage;
enriched anaerobic sludge inoculum
H-type reactor; Spent yeast and ethanol fed MEC;; 2.18 ± 0.66 222 ± 31.3 NA 87 ± 2% COD recovery, [173]
Graphite fiber brush anode at
0.3 V/AgAgCl; A m
3 71 ± 4% CE
Stainless steel mesh cathode;pig manure inoculum
B) Biocathodes and abiotic anodes
Continuous mode double chamber reactor; 0.63
1.2 NA 49% H2 recovery [157]
graphite felt cathode at
0.7 V/SHE
Continuous mode double chamber reactor; 2.2 2.7 50% H2 recovery [79]
graphite felt cathode at
0.7 V/SHE
Double chamber reactor; graphite granules 2.5 NA NA 2.5% H2 recovery [114]
cathode at
0.59 V/SHE; autotrophic biocathode
Double chamber reactor; plain carbon cloth 376.5 mmol
1.28 NA 70% H2 recovery [57]
cathode at
0.8 V/SHE; autotrophic m
2 d
1
thermophilic biocathode
Double chamber reactor; graphite plate cathode; 9.2 L m
2 d
1 1.88 NA 39.4% electron recovery as H2 [82]
autotrophic biocathode at
0.75 V/SHE
Single chamber PANI/MWCNT modified carbon 0.67 205 A m
3 NA 81% energy efficiency, [21]
cloth biocathode; 0.9 V applied voltage 42% H2 recovery, 72% CE

NA: Information not available; PANI: Polyaniline; MWCNT: Multi-walled carbon nanotube; CE: Coulombic efficiency; COD: Chemical oxygen demand.

controls the amount of rhizodeposits for bioelectricity genera-
tion. Reed manna grass [180], rice plants [39] and Spartina anglica
[69] have been utilized in separate studies. PMFCs from
Pennisetum setaceum have been reported to be the most sus-
tainable in terms of power production so far, with a maximum
power generation of 163 mW m
2 [27]. S. anglica PMFCs with
integrated oxygen reducing biocathodes reached the highest
long-term (2 weeks) power output of 240 mW m
2 [202]. PMFCs
along with MSCs having phototrophic biofilms are considered a
promising and novel energy harvesting systems. It was also
identified that the total amount of rhizodeposits available for
oxidation at anode is directly proportional to bioelectricity gen-
eration, rather than the photosynthesis process occurring in the
plant [191].
2.7. Microbial desalination cells (MDCs)
Microbial desalination cells (MDCs) utilize the electric potential
difference developed across the anode and the cathode via MFC
technology to operate in situ desalination. Cao et al. [12] reported
the first water desalination system in combination with MFC
technology. MDCs comprise an additional middle compartment in
between the anode and cathode compartments, for water desali-
nation. The middle compartment is partitioned by an anion ex-
change membrane (AEM) towards the anode and a cation exchange
membrane (CEM) towards the cathode. Bacteria on the anode
oxidize biodegradable substrates and generate electrons and pro-
tons; the electrons are externally transferred to cathode whereas


the anions (e.g., SO2
4 , Cl ) in the desalination compartment
migrate to the anode and the cations (e.g., Kþ, Naþ) are transferred

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
to the cathode to maintain charge neutrality, thereby, desalination
of the middle chamber solution occurs [12,106,107]. In MDC, the
migration of ions from the saline water in the middle chamber
towards the anode and cathode increases the conductivity of the
anolyte and catholyte. Thus, electrical power production in MDC
has been improved due to higher conductivity and mass transfer.
However, the increased salinity of water could adversely affect the
anodic/cathodic bacteria as well as the effluent water quality from
MDC [107]. The MDC can be operated for simultaneous organic and
salt removal with power production or can be combined to the
conventional reverse osmosis (RO) process as a pretreatment for
lowering the salinity of feed solution, and to decrease energy
consumption. Studies have estimated that an MDC can generate up
to 58% of the electrical energy needed by downstream RO systems
[76]. Jacobson et al. [76] compared RO systems that use 2.2 kWh
energy to desalinate 1 m3 of seawater with MDCs, that can produce
1.8 kWh of electric energy, with a net benefit of 4 kWh by treating
1 m3 of seawater. When an MDC is operated in electrolysis mode for
hydrogen production at the cathode, 180e231% surplus energy
than the input electricity can be recovered as H2, with the added
advantage of water desalination [106,117].
3. Wastewater treatment in BES
Bioelectricity generation has been the primary outcome from
the MFC technology. Apart from this, several other advantages are
associated with BES technology. Wastewater treatment is one of the
most important applications of BES. Current processes for biolog-
ical treatment of low concentrated wastewaters are based on the
energy intensive conventional technologies which are not envi-
ronmentally friendly. New approaches of wastewater treatment
enabling substantial energy recovery are the most effective way to
compensate the huge amount of energy consumed in conventional
wastewater treatments. BES associates the benefit of wastewater
treatment from diverse origin and energy and resource recovery
through the production of bioelectricity or other valuable products
[133]. Conventional activated sludge process in domestic waste-
water treatment needs 0.3 kWh m
3 for aeration and about twice of
this amount of energy for the pumping and other purposes [116].
Energy can be recovered from domestic wastewaters via anaerobic
conversion of organic components to methane. But only a portion
of the potentially available energy is recovered through the com-
bined anaerobic digestion and conventional aerobic wastewater
treatment. The energy contained in the dissolved organic fraction is
lost in the aerobic oxidation processes. If anaerobic digestion is
used in place of an aerobic process (activated sludge treatment),
energy recovery as methane is possible but still the requirement of
concentrated waste stream >3 kg m
3 organic load and the main-
tenance of warmer temperatures >20  C are the main limitations
[103]. Also very large digesters are required to make the process
economical. Due to these reasons anaerobic digestion is applied
only to treat the sludge from wastewater and high strength
wastewaters, but not low strength wastewater. When BESs are used
for treating the wastewater, only small amounts of solids (sludge)
are produced. Therefore, there is no need of additional sludge
management and treatment strategies. Direct electricity generation
from wastewaters in MFC can attain high energy efficiencies due to
the absence of carnot cycle limitations in power generation unlike
in combustion processes [103]. However, the energy recovery from
BES still remains low. Power densities produced in MFCs using only
domestic wastewater has attained up to 12 W m
3 [65] which is
equivalent to 0.07 kWh m
3 produced over 6 h (6 h is typical
activated sludge treatment time). However, this energy recovery is
still low as the organic waste in domestic wastewater can poten-
tially produce up to around 2 kWh m
3 based on the methane gas
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
7
that could be generated in anaerobic digestion.
A prediction of the economic gain from the scaled up MFCs
treating wastewater concluded that although electricity generation
will not rationalize the MFC operation, the organic waste removal is
more attractive with this more sustainable technology [55]. In this
context, it is more realistic to utilize wastewaters as the source of
energy and materials for valuable chemical production in-situ in
MEC/MESs [103]. Production of hydrogen or hydrogen peroxide in
MECs with wastewaters as the source of electrons is energetically
beneficial as compared to the production via conventional elec-
trolysis or other means, because the energy contained in waste-
water is further used in the production of chemicals [103]. But as an
exception, in a comparative experimental study between MFC and
MEC, Cusick et al. [34] showed that the treatment efficiency in
terms of chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal and the energy
recoveries in terms of kWh kg
1-COD were higher for MFCs than
MECs with winery and domestic wastewaters. Eventually, utiliza-
tion of BES technology for the treatment and recovery of energy and
chemicals from lower value wastes may become environmentally
and economically beneficial. An estimate of hydrogen production
cost of $4.51/kg-H2 from winery wastewater and $3.01/kg-H2 from
domestic wastewater was reported when both wastewaters were
treated in MEC; these costs of hydrogen production were less than
the estimated market value of hydrogen ($6 kg
1-H2) [34].
4. Recalcitrant pollutants degradation in BES
4.1. Dye decolorization and removal
Azo dyes, most of which are xenobiotics, contain one or more
azo groups (-N]N-), and are the most widely used synthetic dyes
in textile, leather, cosmetics, plastics and food industries. Industrial
wastewaters containing dyes creates environmental problems due
to their persistent colors which spoil the aesthetic values and
causality to toxic effects [127,193]). The contamination of azo dyes
in surface water hampers light penetration and decreases the
amounts of dissolved oxygen, thereby threatening the aquatic life.
Studies have shown that azo dyes are toxic and mutagenic
[164,192]. Dyes are designed to be chemically and photolytically
stable and are also not easily degradable to natural microbial action.
Due to their complex chemical structures, the decolorization of
these wastes is a challenging task. A range of physicochemical
treatments exists to decolorize effluents containing dyes. Namely,
(i) chemical treatments like ozonation [31], alkalinisation etc.; (ii)
physical treatments like adsorption, flocculation-coagulation etc.;
(iii) photo degradation; (iv) membrane processes [111] and (v) a
few biological treatments [89] can effectively decolorize the in-
dustrial wastewaters. But these techniques are generally very
expensive because they require large amounts of chemicals and
additionally produce considerable amounts of sludge.
Bioelectrochemical systems are successfully proven to decol-
orize the dyes [33,127,186]. The range of the half-cell potentials for
the reduction of azo dyes to their constituent aromatic amines was
reported to be between
530 and
180 mV versus the standard
hydrogen electrode (vs SHE) [193]. Sun et al. [186] carried out the
decolorization of active brilliant red X-3B (ABRX3) utilizing the
electrons generated from the biodegradation of readily biode-
gradable organic matter at the anode of air-cathode single-chamber
MFC with concurrent bioelectricity generation. Glucose and con-
fectionery wastewaters were found to be suitable co-substrates for
ABRX3 decolorization. ABRX3 decolorization was significantly
improved in MFCs as compared to conventional anaerobic treat-
ment. Mu et al. [127] used BES to decolorize acid orange 7 (AO7)
abiotically in the cathode, using acetate as the electron donor at the
bioanode. AO7 decolorization rates up to 2.64 ± 0.03 mol m
3 d
1
8 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

Fig. 2. Possible mechanism of Acid Orange 7 reduction in bioelectrochemical systems. “Adapted with permission from (Mu et al. [127] Copyright (2009). American Chemical
Society.”

were achieved with simultaneous power generation, whereas the
decolorization rate was enhanced five times when power was
supplied to the BES maintaining the cathode potential at
400 mV
(vs SHE). The identification of decolorization products suggests the
cathodic reaction mechanism depicted in Fig. 2.
Alizarin yellow R (AYR) was decolorized in a dual-chamber BES
with a biocathode of enriched autotrophic biodegrading inoculum
[33]. Within 48 h of operation under the optimized condition of pH
5.2, and 0.5 V of supplied voltage, the decolorization efficiency was
as high as 99.2% (from initial concentration of 100 mg L
1), which
was higher than the efficiency obtained from abiotic and mixed
sludge-inoculated biocathode operations.
4.2. Organochlorine removal
Organochlorines are organic compounds containing at least
one covalently bonded chlorine atom. Many derivatives of or-
ganochlorines persist in the environment and have been found
toxic to plants and animals, including humans. Industrial chlori-
nated solvents, bleaching and preservative agents and chlorine-
containing pesticides are the main anthropogenic source of
recalcitrant organochlorines. Improper handling and disposal of
industrial solvents and degreasing agents such as per-
chloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) contaminate the
soil and groundwater. The physico-chemical technologies to treat
these subsurface pollutants are normally very expensive. Natu-
rally existing anaerobic microorganisms can decay and detoxify
the chlorinated pollutants via in situ bioremediation processes
and restore the contaminated soil and groundwater effectively
and inexpensively [105]. A brief list of the removal of organo-
chlorines through different types of BES, is overviewed in Table 4.
Anaerobic bacteria can dechlorinate chlorinated aliphatic hydro-
carbons (CAHs) in groundwater, by using them as terminal elec-
tron acceptor for microbial respiration [165]. Incomplete
dechlorination of PCE and TCE to the interemediate cis-
dichloroethene (cis-DCE) and then to vinyl chloride (VC) gener-
ally occurs in halorespiration. VC is a singly chlorinated ethene
and a known carcinogen. Chlorinated compounds (PCE, TCE and
cis-DCE) reducing microorganisms compete for electrons in ace-
tate and hydrogen intermediates with sulfate, iron (III), and CO2
reducers [165]. Generally hydrogen (H2) is considered as ultimate
electron donor for reductive dechlorination by Desulfitobacterium

Table 4
BESs for dechlorination of trichloroethene and other chlorinated compounds.

Compound BES Electrode Operating mode Removal rate Reference

(mol m
3d
1)

Trichloroethene Mediator- Methyl Viologen Glassy carbon cathode, Batch fed 0.001 [2]
platinum disk anode

1
Trichloroethene Direct graphite electrodes Batch 25 mmol d [184]
Trichloroethene Direct Carbon paper [1]
Trichloroethene Undetectable mediator Glassy carbon cathode, Batch fed 0.002e0.004 [3]
platinum disk anode
Trichloroethene Direct Graphite cathode 64 ± 2 mmol L
1 d
1 [4]
4-chlorophenol MFC; acetate in anode, Carbon fiber anode Batch fed 0.3 [61]
4-chlorophenol in and cathode
abiotic cathode
1,2-dichloroethane MFC; Dichloroethane in anode Graphite plate Recirculated 0.061e0.068 [138]
Ferricyanide in cathode anode and graphite anode and batch
granule cathode fed cathode
2-chlorophenol MEC acetate in anode, Graphite granule anode Batch fed 0.04 [183]
2-chlorophenol in biocathode and cathode

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
spp and Dehalococcoides spp. [43,96,209]. But acetate and H2,
solely or in combination, were identified as key electron donors
to stimulate anaerobic microbial dechlorination of chloroethenes
to ethene at the chloroethene-contaminated site [66]. When ac-
etate or H2 alone was the electron donor, syntrophic acetate-
oxidizing species or H2/CO2 acetogens respectively were present
as the co-culture. Certain dechlorinating bacteria were discovered
to be able to accept electrons directly from polarized graphite
electrodes to sustain the dechlorination process [1,184]. These
findings have led to the development of BESs for groundwater
remediation. TCE-dechlorinating bacteria can directly gain the
required electrons from a negatively polarized carbon paper
electrode [1]. Aulenta et al. [4] investigated the performance of
TCE dechlorination in bioelectrochemical reactor operating for
about 570 days at different cathode potentials ranging
from
250 mV to
750 mV vs SHE. At a cathode potential
of
250 mV vs SHE, methanogenesis was almost suppressed and
94.7% of available electrons were accounted for dechlorination,
whereas at the cathode potential below
450 mV vs SHE, a
higher TCE dechlorination rate up to 64 ± 2 mmol L
1d
1 was
achieveddbut simultaneous methanogenesis was reported
consuming about 60% of electric current [4]. BES for dechlorina-
tion has shown stable and reproducible performance even in the
absence of organic carbon sources confirming long-term direct
exocellular electron transfer [1,4]. Studies have also been carried
out to demonstrate the dechlorination of other chlorinated
compounds in the BES including the dechlorination of chlor-
ophenols and 1,2edichloroethane [74].
4.3. Sulfide removal
Organic wastes and wastewaters generated from many pro-
cesses ubiquitously contain sulfur compounds. Biological conver-
sion of sulfur compounds in the wastewaters by sulfate reducing
bacterial releases sulfides, which are toxic, odorous and corrosive.
Sulfate reducing bacteria like Desulfovibrio desulfuricans are
commonly found in the wastewaters containing high organic load.
Treatment of sulfate-rich wastewaters with biological sulfate
reduction processes is a well-known effective method but the
treatment process is limited due to the generation of sulfides and
other sulfur-based gases which inhibit the bacterial metabolism
and even cause the failure of the process, associated to the corrosive
and toxic nature of the sulfides [219]. MFCs can be used to remove
sulfides by oxidizing them electrochemically at the anode and, in
Fig. 3. Pathways of sulfide/sulfate removal in MFCs. Reactions 1 is biological metabolism in sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB); Reactions 2 and 3 are chemical in nature.
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
9
parallel, power can be generated [62,145]. As per the reactions
mentioned in Eqs. (1) and (2) and also according to Fig. 3, sulfate
was biologically reduced to sulfide which was then catalytically
oxidized to sulfate using different anodes such as a metal
hydroxide-modified graphite [62], charcoal [32], graphite foil, car-
bon fiber veil and activated carbon cloth [219]. In these studies,
oxygen was reduced at the air-cathode to maintain the electron
flow through the external circuit.
D:desulfuricans Anode
Sulfate ƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒ! Sulfide ƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒ! Sulfate
Biocatalytical reaction Electrochemical reaction
(1)
Paracoccus spp Paracoccus sppþanode
ƒ! Sulfide ƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒ! Sulfur
Sulfate ƒƒƒƒƒƒ (2)
Rabaey et al. [145] reported sulfide and sulfate removal from the
wastewater, as solid sulfur accumulation on the granular graphite
anode of the MFC, with the ferricyanide redox couple for the
cathodic reaction. The biocatalysts identified in this anaerobic
oxidation of sulfide were Paracoccus species. In this process, sulfide
was shuttling the electrons between the bacteria and anode, un-
dergoing an oxidation to insoluble elemental sulfur. In the tubular
MFC with air-cathode, at most 514 mg sulfide L
1 day
1 (unit
normalized to net anodic compartment volume, NAC) was removed
via biocatalytical oxidation to elemental sulfur that resulted elec-
tricity generation which accounted maximum power outputs of
101 mW L
1 NAC [145]. Activated carbon cloth was identified as a
superior anode material for sulfide oxidation to sulfate, when
compared to graphite foil and carbon fiber, and it enabled to extract
higher electric power density (0.51 mW cm
2) in the batch mode
operation of a single-chambered, air-cathode MFCs, using sulfate-
rich solutions [219]. Oxidation of solid sulfur to sulfate requires a
high positive overpotential, whereas sulfide can be oxidized to
elemental sulfur when the anode potential is controlled at or
above
0.27 V (vs SHE) in aqueous solutions at neutral pH (Fig. 3).
In the sulfide removing MFCs, elemental sulfur and/or soluble
polysulfide species were the dominant sulfide oxidation products
in the anode chamber [219].
4.4. Chromium removal
Reduction of hexavalent chromium Cr(VI) at the cathode of
MFCs has high utility in the bioremediation of Cr(VI) contaminated
10 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

sites, as the technology has low cost of operation, self-regenerating produced a surplus energy of 3.46 kJ gN
1 which was more than the
ability and also provides a sustainable power supply [74]. Cr(VI) can required energy for the ammonium recovery by stripping [90].
be electrochemically or biocatalytically reduced to less toxic, less
soluble and less mobile trivalent chromium Cr(III). Acidic envi-
6. Production of chemicals in BES
ronment is required at the cathode for the electrochemical Cr(VI)
reduction in abiotic condition [199]. Several bacterial species of
6.1. Hydrogen
Bacilli and Clostridia as well as a number of proteobacter species
such as Pseudomonas dechromaticans, Escherichia coli, Desulfovibrio
Wastewaters from industrial, agricultural and municipal sources
vulgaris, Shewanella oneidensis, Aeronomas dechromatica and
contain large amounts of dissolved organic matter that are a po-
Enterobacter cloacae were reported to catalyze Cr(VI) reduction
tential resource for chemical and fuel production [155]. Biological
whenever a suitable carbon source like acetate was available to the
treatment technologies are known for the production of energy
biocatalysts [18,187]. The reduction of Cr(VI) was also attained in an
from wastewaters. Methanogenic anaerobic digestion has already
air-bubbling-cathode MFC in which the electrochemical reduction
been used worldwide for the production of biogas (a mixture of
of oxygen to H2O2 strongly favored the reduction of Cr(VI) [95].
methane and CO2). Hydrogen production from wastewaters by
Improvement to the biocathode for Cr (VI) reduction and electricity
acetogenic fermentation is another method of utilization of
generation was reported by [73] using tubular MFCs in which the
wastewaters [120,121]. However, low yields and thermodynamic
cathode to anode surface area ratio of 3:1 was maintained. Specific
limitations in microbial metabolism exist in the fermentation
rates of Cr(VI) reduction between 12.4 and 20.6 mg g
1 volatile
process. BESs offer an alternative technology to upgrade the
suspended solid (VSS) h
1 were achieved with power generation
hydrogen yield at a relatively low electric energy input when
from 6.8 to 15 W m
3 using a graphite-fiber as cathode support for
compared to conventional water electrolysis; more specifically,
the biocatalyst. The graphite fiber biocathode showed better per-
MEC mode of operation has shown promising rates of hydrogen
formance for chromium reduction when compared to graphite felt
production. This technology is also termed as bio-
or graphite granules [73]. The rate of Cr(VI) reduction and elec-
electrohydrogenesis [97,136,152,156]. Hydrogen is extensively
tricity generation in MFCs were affected by various physicochem-
used both as chemical and fuel, in various industrial processes such
ical and biological conditions, like pH, redox mediators and the
as upgrading fossil fuels and saturating fats, hence H2 has unique
bacterial electrochemical activity. In addition, the anode potential,
values compared to methane. On COD basis, H2 production from
electrode materials and reactor configurations also influenced the
wastewater is 7 times more valuable than methane produced from
efficiency of the Cr(VI) reducing biocathode [74].
the same amount of wastewater [155]. H2 production in MEC can be
done from various organic sources, including waste materials as
5. Metal and nutrient recovery in BES
well as non-fermentable substrates [98]. Principally, bacteria
oxidize organic compounds typically, acetate and generate CO2,
Application of MFCs has not been limited only to the wastewater
electrons and protons at the anode of an MEC. The electrochemical
treatment and electricity generation, it has also expanded to
interaction of bacteria transfers the electrons to the solid anode.
electricity-driven production of number of value-added compounds
With an external voltage, the electrons flow to the cathode where
such as H2, acetate, etc. at the cathode [63]. MFCs have also been
they combine with protons to form hydrogen gas (Eqs. (3) and (4))
applied for the removal and recovery of metals from leachates and
[99]. For charge neutrality, the protons migrate from anode to
effluents from mining and metallurgical processes that would pref-
cathode in the solution. In practice, an applied voltage of >0.2 V is
erably result in the recovery of metals especially copper for (re-)use in
required for H2 production in MEC, which is less than the typical
industries [63]. A subsequent study by Ter Heijne et al. [68] demon-
voltage (>1.6 V) required for water electrolysis [98,99]. A mem-
strated the electrochemical reduction of copper at cathode, using
brane separates the anode and cathode chamber to avoid the
bioelectrochemical acetate oxidation at the anode. In this bio-
mixing of the substrate and product. The reactions that occur in a
electrochemical process, a bipolar membrane (BPM) was used for
MEC with acetate as substrate are as below.
simultaneous bioelectricity generation along with copper reduction/
removal at the cathode. The reduced copper was plated onto a flat
At anode : CH3 COO
þ 4H2 O/2HCO


3 þ 8e þ 9H
þ
(3)
plate graphite electrode at a current density of 3.2 A m
2. Further
studies accomplished higher current densities in the range of 0.9e7
A m
2 along with copper removal by using a larger anode surface than At cathode : 8Hþ þ 8e
/4H2 or 8H2 O þ 8e
/4H2


the cathode surface [119,212]. Zhang et al. [214] validated the recovery þ 8OH
of vanadium (V) and chromium (Cr) in dual chambered MFCs by
(4)
employing vanadium and chromium-containing wastewater as the
cathodic electron acceptor with simultaneous bioelectricity genera- Theoretically, hydrogen formation at the cathode occurs after
tion. The maximum power density of these MFCs was 970 mW m
2 overcoming the endothermic barrier of
0.414 V vs SHE by
and showed enhanced electrode reduction efficiency by using the two applying only a small external voltage difference of 0.14 V to the
electron acceptors V5þ and Cr6þ together [214]. MEC, the oxidation reaction carried out by the anodic bacteria can
Apart from metals, nutrient recovery was also observed with supply the remaining overpotential (
0.279 V) [98,154]. Concom-
MFCs. Particularly, successful ammonium (NHþ 4 ) recovery from itant wastewater treatment and H2 production in MEC is an effi-
urine was demonstrated by Kuntke et al. [90]. The electrons required cient approach to generate clean energy. The utilization of a wide
for the migration of NHþ 4 from anode to cathode are generated by the range of organic compounds by exoelectrogens in MECs makes it
anodic bacteria from the oxidation of organic matter. At the cathode, sustainable and economically advantageous. However, the
diffusion of ammonia (NH3) promotes the total ammonium trans- hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) occurs very slowly on carbon
ported to the cathode. Due to the localized high pH prevailing in the cathodes of MEC and need to overcome a high endothermic po-
cathode, NH3 stripping occurs and thus improves the transport of tential barrier (overpotential). To reduce the overpotentials, plat-
ammonium. The ammonium recovery rate and current density were inum (Pt) has been used as the catalyst. Electrodes with different
registered as 3.29 g-N d
1 m
2 (vs membrane surface area) and 0.50 amounts of platinum loadings are commercially available and also
A m
2 (vs membrane surface area), respectively and the process prepared in laboratory. Titanium with platinum coating is used as

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
cathode to avoid the overpotentials. However, platinum based
electrodes are very expensive. Cathodes made from cheap non-
noble metals like stainless steel, nickel (Ni) or nickel alloys have
also been tested for H2 production in MEC [71,110,162,163]. Nickel
and Nickel Molybdenum (NiMo) electrocatalysts have shown good
results with only a slightly larger overpotential than platinum
[72,156]. By increasing the specific surface area of the Ni cathodes,
the cathode overpotential was lowered and high hydrogen pro-
duction over 50 m3 m
3 MEC d
1 was attained [80].
It has been shown that bacteria can also catalyze the HER at
biocathodes [78,157]. Studies have focused on the upscaling and
improvement of H2 production in MEC by finding good performing
cathodes materials. A bench scale 4 L MEC reactor using stainless
steel as cathode produced 0.9 m3 H2 m
3-MEC d
1 which had
graphite felt as anode to treat acetate-containing saline wastewater
[13]. An overview of the performances of H2 producing MECs along
with their operating conditions is presented in Table 3. Although
the applied voltage controls the electric current, the current den-
sities reported in MECs increased with the specific surface area of
electrodes. Higher current densities are reported with larger spe-
cific surface anodes like carbon felt and graphite brush anodes
(Table 3). Likewise, the production at the cathode of MEC is also
enhanced by increasing the cathode surface area. Generally, metal
catalysts, like Pt and Ni are used for higher hydrogen production.
6.2. Acetate
MES took another approach to fix CO2 in multi-carbon com-
pounds such as liquid fuels or chemicals by electricity-driven
reduction reactions. This application is considered as a technol-
ogy for the storage of electrical energy in the CarboneCarbon bond
of value-added chemicals [130]. demonstrated the first proof of
microbial electrosynthesis using the acetogen Sporomusa ovata that
could use electrons directly derived from a graphite cathode for the
reduction of CO2 to produce acetate and small quantities of 2-
oxobutyrate [130]. Electron recovery in these products was more
than 85% of the electrons transferred at the cathodes. Subsequent
studies demonstrated the process of CO2 reduction using MES with
a wider range of microorganisms [129]. These studies showed the
ability of other acetogenic bacteria, including Sporomusa silvacetica,
Sporomusa sphaeroides, Clostridium ljungdahlii, Clostridium aceticum
and Moorella thermoacetica to reduce CO2 to acetate, 2-oxobutyrate
and formate. Electron recoveries in acetate and 2-oxobutyrate were
accounted for 84%, 48 ± 6%, 82 ± 10% and 53 ± 4% in S. silvacetica,
S. sphaeroides, C. ljungdahlii and C. aceticum respectively. Gong et al.
[60] showed that sulfide can be used as electron donor at the anode
for microbial electrosynthesis. The study used a sulfur oxidizer,
Desulfobulbus propionicus, at anode as a biocatalyst to oxidize
elemental sulfur to sulfate. The electrons generated in biotic anode
were used for CO2 reduction to acetate growing S. ovata on a
graphite cathode. Marshall et al. [113] showed the improvements in
rate of acetate production by CO2 reduction using mixed microbial
communities termed as microbiomes. Jiang et al. [81] used a biotic
cathode of mixed culture of that accepts electrons from the anode
and produced H2 abiotically to fix CO2 into methane and acetate.
Bioelectrochemical CO2 reduction with electron capture efficiency
of 97% was reported controlling the cathode potential
below
950 mV vs NHE [81]. Marshall et al. [114] demonstrated
improved performance of microbial electrosynthesis for acetate
production at the highest rate of 1 g L
1 d
1 by autotrophic
microbiomes when operated for long term. Furthermore, the long
term adaptation resulted into a stable and resilient biocathode.
The conditions of the MES process must be created to allow the
optimal metabolism of biocatalyst present at the biocathode. A
suitable terminal electron acceptor should be available for the
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
11
reduction reaction. In addition, the cathodic or applied potential
that breaks the thermodynamic barrier of a biological reaction
should be applied for a successful reduction reaction in MES.
Homoacetogenic bacteria can efficiently convert CO2 to acetate,
which is a major intermediate molecule for the production of bio-
chemicals [8]. Thermodynamically, the conversion of CO2 to acetate
requires
280 mV vs SHE cathodic potential. However, under
practical conditions a much lower potential is required to overcome
the potential losses due to the microbial energy uptake and mass
and charge transfer resistances involved in bioelectrochemical
system. Apart from the above factors, several other underlying
factors such as electrode materials, reactor design, mediators in
electron transfer influence the overall process efficiency [41]. At
present the MES technology is at its infancy, therefore current
studies are mainly focused on fabricating new proofs of concept.
6.3. Methane
Methane generation from anaerobic digestion of organic sub-
strates has long been in practice and it is considered as a renewable
process. Still, to improve the sustainability of the methane gener-
ation process, recycling of the CO2 generated from various biolog-
ical processes can be integrated to produce more methane through
microbial electrosynthesis. Microbial electrosynthesis of methane,
also known as electromethanogenesis, can proceed at lower tem-
peratures than anaerobic digestion. The specialty of electro-
methanogenesis through MEC is that the organic matter present in
wastewater can be treated and at the same time methane pro-
duction is achieved. This process provides more advantages than
traditional methanogenesis in terms of higher methane yield and
utilization of the effluents issued from anaerobic digestion pro-
cesses [30,197].
Clauwaert and Verstraete [30] showed bioelectrochemical
methane production using a single chamber configuration in MEC
mode, using plain graphite as electrode. An applied potential
of
0.8 V (vs SHE) was employed, reporting a maximum methane
production rate of 0.75 ± 0.12 L L
1-MEC d
1 from 4.13 kg m
3-
MEC d
1 COD loading with 86 ± 14% of acetate to methane con-
version, whereas without voltage application only 0.17 ± 0.06 L L
1-
MEC d
1 of methane were generated at a COD feeding of
1.38 kg m
3-MEC d
1 with 47 ± 17% of acetate to methane con-
version. Treatment of anaerobic digestion effluents in a single
chamber MEC with methane production was prospected as a viable
technology for efficient waste treatment [30]. Sasaki et al. [161]
focused on the use of a membrane-less configuration under a
working potential of
0.395 or
0.595 V (vs SHE) at neutral pH and
demonstrated efficient methane production. It was observed that
the dominating methanogens on the cathode were different from
those grown in control reactors with no electrochemical reactions
[161].
In the scalability studies on MEC with multi-electrode configu-
rations for H2 production using acetate as substrate Rader et al.
[146], reported that the methanogenesis rates increased gradually
with time. After 16 days of operation, the system showed little H2
production but a subsequent CH4 production with good substrate
conversion efficiency, showing that electromethanogenesis became
the predominant process at the biocathode, when operated with
effluents from dark fermentation and anaerobic digestion processes
[146].
A biocathode dominated by Methanobacterium palustre was
shown to successfully reduce CO2 to methane, in combination with
an abiotic graphite anode through a mediator-less mechanism
(kind of direct electron transfer) [26]. The thermodynamic con-
straints of methane production from CO2 reduction, predict a
cathodic potential requirement of
0.244 V vs SHE at standard
12 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
biological conditions. Practically, a wide range of applied cathode
potentials (i.e. between
0.5 and
1.0 V vs SHE) have been re-
ported for electromethanogenesis [22,26,196]. Cheng et al. [26]
demonstrated electromethanogenesis in combination with abiotic
and biotic anodes and also with dual chamber and single chamber
combinations. Methane production with 80% overall efficiency
(electrical energy þ substrate enthalpy) at
0.8 V vs SHE cathode in
a single-chamber MEC was reported, with an anodic biofilm
growing on acetate. In a double-chamber BES with an abiotic anode
[26] achieved 4.5 L m
2 d
1 of methane production with 96% en-
ergy/coulombic efficiency, controlling the cathode at
0.8 V vs SHE.
Compared to conventional methanogenesis, the advantage of bio-
electrosynthesis is the physical separation of the oxidation of
organic waste from methane production, which protects the
methanogenic consortia from the inhibitory compounds that can
be present in the waste stream, and CO2 can be recycled for
methane production. Villano et al. [195,196] used mixed meth-
anogenic cultures as cathodic biocatalysts in dual chamber
configuration to produce methane from CO2 at several applied
cathode potentials between -0.65 V to -1.0 V (vs SHE).
6.4. Other chemicals
In recent studies on BESs, the production of value-added
chemicals and fuels other than acetate, methane and hydrogen
has been highlighted [103,144]. Valuable products such as
hydrogen peroxide and caustic soda were produced at the metallic
cathode of MEC by applying external electric potential and at the
concomitantly achieved improved performance efficiency for
wastewater treatment [25,142,158]. Electrosynthesis of fuels such
as methanol has long been reported from the electrochemical
reduction of CO2 using metal catalysts like copper [5] but the
process is energy intensive and not sustainable. In this context,
microbial electrosynthesis could be a less energy intensive and
sustainable solution for electricity-driven fuel and chemical pro-
duction. In recent studies, small amounts of ethanol and butyrate
production have been reported as secondary products in MES, from
CO2 reduction using lithoautotrophs [6] whereas the heterotrophic
production of ethanol from acetate as substrate has been demon-
strated at the cathode of BES [179]. Most of the MES studies on CO2
reduction reported H2 evolution at the cathode as a mediator for
the microbial CO2 reduction [6,81,114]. As an alternative to H2-
driven MES for CO2 fixation, an innovative strategy has been sug-
gested that uses formic acid (HCOOH) as an energy carrier [175].
Formic acid production from CO2 and water by bioelectrochemical
reactions, and its further conversion to isobutanol by engineered
Ralstonia eutropha was demonstrated [91]. The R. eutropha strain
was engineered to divert the usual poly-hydroxybutyrate synthesis
pathway to produce liquid fuel and also made it able to withstand
electric current. The metabolically engineered strain was also used
for the conversion of CO2 to ethanol [131]. Xafenias et al. [204]
showed increased 1,3-propanediol titers using a mixed-culture as
biocatalyst, with glycerol as a substrate. Along with the all the
above discussed products, few reports are available on the pro-
duction of butanol, acetone and succinate through MES processes
[58,166].
7. BES based biosensors
MFC technology can be applied for the easy and fast testing of
the water quality. MFC based biosensors have been proposed in
recent studies for the detection of toxic compounds and for the
measurement of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of water
samples. MFCs have the potential advantage for on-site and real-
time monitoring of water quality [16,17]. MFC technology can also
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
be highly cost-effective in comparison with the conventional sen-
sors, as it can be built on low cost carbon-based materials. In MFC
based biosensors, oxidation of organic matter in the inflow feed
was catalyzed by the bacteria growing on the anode and produce
electrons giving an electrical signal. The electrical signal generated
by the MFC is associated with the rate of metabolic activity of the
biofilm at the anode [42]. Any disturbance in the bacterial activity is
interpreted into a change in the electric current. When toxic
compounds are present in the feed water, the bacterial activities
will be affected, which can be detected in the variation in electrical
signal. This extent of change in electric current was shown to be
directly associated to the specific disturbance imposed to the bio-
anode when other operational parameters of MFC such as pH,
temperature and conductivity of the feeding solution were kept
constant [185]. MFCs were highly sensitive with regards to many
compounds present in the feed water. Hence, it can be used as an
early warning signal. In MFC based biosensors, transducers were
not required to translate the signal to a readable one as the bacterial
growth on the anode directly produce measureable electrical signal
from the sensing element. The application of MFC as biosensor for
BOD and toxic contaminants in water has been separately discussed
as in the following sections.
7.1. BOD sensors
BOD has been used as a basic parameter to quantify the extent of
organic contamination in the water systems. The electronic charge
generated from a mediator-less MFC is in good positive correlation
to the concentration of organic matters. So, MFCs have been
investigated as BOD sensors [16,17,87]. Chang et al. [16] continu-
ously monitored the BOD of sample water on-line using an MFC, by
measuring the electric current in amperometric mode. BOD values
of up to 100 mg L
1 were in good linear fit with the electric current
generated. An extrapolation of the fitted model can be used to
measure higher BOD values [16,17]. MFC as a BOD sensor can
operate with stable performance for over 5 years with minimum
maintenance service [16]. A performance overview of MFC-based
BOD sensors is presented in Table 5, along with the operational
characteristics of the MFCs. In all of the literature mentioned in
Table 5, inoculation of the anode with mixed bacterial cultures is-
sued from wastewater was carried out to widen the variety of us-
able substrates and also for long-term performance stability. The
quickest response time of MFC-based BOD sensors was 2.8 min for a
scaled-down single chamber MFC and the response-time varied
with the reactor design [42]. Table 5 shows that the most recent
studies have improved the BOD detection range and response time
of MFC based sensors.
7.2. Toxicity sensors
MFC-based toxicity sensors was first demonstrated by [88]
which showed the variation in the electrical current in response
to the presence of contaminants such as heavy metals, like Pb and
Hg, organophosphorus pesticides (e.g. Diazinon) and poly-
chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the water samples. Principally, the
substrate consumption rate and the microbial activity in MFC bio-
sensors are directly linked to the electric current generated. A
decrement in electric current under the exposure to a toxin, when
all of the operational conditions remain same, is an indication of
toxic inhibition. An effect of toxic components on the
electrochemically-active bacteria has been shown by a shift in the
polarization curves, specifically a doseeresponse relationship for
nickel was visualized in the polarization curves [178]. A higher
concentration of contaminant leads to a lower current at all over-
potentials [177,178]. MFC-based biosensors studied for the
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18 13

Table 5
Overview of performance, design and functional characteristics of MFCs used as BOD sensors.

Source of inoculum Anode Configuration Detection range Saturation signal Response time References
(BOD5, mg L
1)

Enriched consortium (waste water) Graphite felt Two chamber 2.58e206 1.1 mA 0.5e10 h [87]
(based on charge)
Consortium (activated sludge) Graphite felt Two chamber 23e100 6 mA 1h [16]
Consortium (primary clarifier) Carbon paper Two chamber 10e250 233 mA m
2 40 min [218]
Consortium (from an active MFC) Carbon cloth Single chamber 3e164 35 mA 2.8e8.7 min [42]
(air breathing cathode)

Table 6
Overview of the reactor, performance and functional characteristics of MFCs used as toxicant sensors.

Source of inoculum Anode material Toxicant-detection range (mg L
1) Baseline signal Response time References

Mixed culture (Activated sludge) Graphite felt Diazinon:1e10 0.04 mA 20 mine2 h [88]
Pb: 1e10
Hg: 1e10
PCBs: 1e10
Mixed culture (active MFC) Graphite plate Cu2þ: 85 1.37 A m
2 50e100 min [176]
Geobacter sulfurreducensn Ti/Ni/Au tri-layer Formaldehyde 0.1%e4% 4 mA cm
2 <5 min [36]
Mixed culture (active MFC) Graphite plate Ni: 10 2.25 mA 30 min [177]
Mixed culture (waste-water) Carbon cloth Cr6þ: 1e8 0.10e0.12 V 5 min [92]
Fe3þ: 1, 8, 48
NO
3 : 1, 8, 48
Mixed culture (active MFC) Carbon cloth Cd2þ 0.1e100 mg L
1 32.2 mA 12 min [42]

detection of toxic components in water which are summarized in
Table 6. Table 6 shows that the lowest detection limit of the MFC
biosensors was 1 mg L
1 for heavy metals like Pb, Hg, Cr and even
100 mg L
1 for Cd, while the upper limits of detection were not
assessed within the short range of concentrations employed.
It has been established that MFC based sensors could be sen-
sitive to the target compounds with the detection limits lower
than 1 ppm, and can be operated for long time with stable per-
formance. However, a few key constraints of MFC-based bio-
sensors have to be addressed for full scale installation of this
technology. These constraints are low selectivity, lower detection
limit, risk of other microbial infections and mass-transfer limita-
tions concerning substrates and products [35]. Recent advances
made in MFC-based biosensors have broadened the perspective
for simple, on-site and cost-effective water quality monitoring.
The use of highly acid/base tolerant and halo-tolerant microbes in
MFC biosensors will be highly attractive for industrial wastewater
monitoring [35].
8. Future prospects and conclusions
BESs are versatile systems designed for converting chemical
energy into electrical energy (and vice-versa) while employing
microbes as catalysts. MES is the most recent application of BESs
utilized for the electricity-driven chemical and fuel production.
However, the understanding of the multi-disciplinary aspects
involved in MES processes is still on its infancy. Compared to
conventional industrial microbiology, MES requires more expertise
from other disciplines such as electrochemistry, bio-
electrochemistry and materials sciences. Generally, the perfor-
mance of any biological system is dependent on the substrate
conversion, biocatalyst activity, specificity of the enzymes involved
in the conversion process and redox conditions. In the case of
electrochemical processes it also depends on the conductivity of
the electrolyte (either anolyte or catholyte), mediators involved,
anode and cathode potentials, overpotentials (voltage losses), mass
and charge transfer etc. Since MES result from a combination of
these two processes, the overall limitations are especially complex
and difficult to identify.
The above stated limitations were generally established for
MFC technologies in which only one biological component is
present, whereas in the case of biocathodes, plenty of limitations
are typically associated beyond the anodes. Reduction of over-
potentials and high coulombic efficiencies often remain the main
technological challenges of BES to solve in future applications.
Upscaling the production at industrial scale is also found as the
major limiting step for BES technologies. Stacking up the number
of MFCs and integration of number of electrodes in a single sys-
tem have been reported in literature. Even though the research so
far provided promising results, the upscaling of BES still need to
address the overpotentials and other associated design aspects.
Reproducibility of bench scale performances in the large scale
systems will certainly make the process economically and
environmentally feasible. Studies have also proposed the possible
way to incorporate the BES technology in existing wastewater
treatment plants. It has been projected more technically feasible
to incorporate MEC for simultaneous waste treatment and
hydrogen production than running MFC for electricity generation
from wastewater. The possible and appropriate scheme to incor-
porate MEC to produce hydrogen gas in existing wastewater
treatment plant as proposed by Escapa et al. [49] is shown in
Fig. 4.
In anodic mechanism of MFCs, mixed cultures are considered
to be as effective biocatalysts with wastewaters as substrate. In
MES, less is known about the behavior of cathodic biofilms,
planktonic cells and electron transfer mechanism involved. It is
also necessary to understand the interface of both biofilms and
planktonic cells. Conceptually, mixed as well as pure homo-
acetogenic bacterial cultures could effectively carry out CO2
reduction. The electron transfer efficiency and involved mecha-
nism, biofilms sustainability in electrochemical system and
biochemistry of the microorganisms command the selection of
type of biocatalyst to be chosen. Selection of biocatalyst is also
influenced by the terminal electron acceptor to be used for
reduction process. To take full advantage of MES, it is very
important to understand which intracellular and extracellular

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
14 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18

Fig. 4. Possible scheme to incorporate BES in wastewater treatment plant. Flowchart shows the processes in an existing wastewater treatment plant (top) and the proposed plant
(bottom) incorporating the Microbial Electrolysis Cell for wastewater treatment and hydrogen production. “Adapted from Escapa et al. [49] Copyright (2012), with permission from
Elsevier”.

factors influence the metabolic rate.
The combination of BES technology with the fermentation
technology termed as Electro-fermentation (EF) has added a new
future prospect of versatile BES application. The concept is to use
electrical energy as source of reducing power for microbial
fermentation and also to provide the required electrons for gen-
eration of the product of interest. Researchers from the BES and
fermentation disciplines are focusing on EF. EF is foreseen as po-
tential application to overcome many biological, electrochemical,
logistical and economic challenges incorporated in the production
of value-added products in BES.
Acknowledgments
Suman Bajracharya is supported by a PhD grant from VITO's
strategic research fund (1310225). Mohita Sharma acknowledges
Indo-Belgian scholarship from the Flemish Government (Vlaamse
Gemeenschap-1F2B8G/JDW/2012-2013/12-BTL-IND-02) for sup-
porting her stay at VITO. G. Mohanakrishna gratefully acknowl-
edges the Marie-Curie Intra-European Fellowship (IEF) supported
project BIO-ELECTRO-ETHYLENE (Grant No: 626959) from the Eu-
ropean Commission.
References
[1] F. Aulenta, A. Canosa, P. Reale, S. Rossetti, S. Panero, M. Majone, Microbial
reductive dechlorination of trichloroethene to ethene with electrodes
serving as electron donors without the external addition of redox mediators,
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 103 (2009) 85e91.
[2] F. Aulenta, A. Catervi, M. Majone, S. Panero, P. Reale, S. Rossetti, Electron
transfer from a solid-state electrode assisted by methyl viologen sustains
efficient microbial reductive dechlorination of TCE, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41
(2007) 2554e2559.
[3] F. Aulenta, P. Reale, A. Canosa, S. Rossetti, S. Panero, M. Majone, Character-
ization of an electro-active biocathode capable of dechlorinating tri-
chloroethene and cis-dichloroethene to ethene, Biosens. Bioelectron. 25
(2010) 1796e1802, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2009.12.033.
[4] F. Aulenta, L. Tocca, R. Verdini, P. Reale, M. Majone, Dechlorination of Tri-
chloroethene in a continuous-flow bioelectrochemical reactor: effect of
cathode potential on rate, selectivity, and electron transfer mechanisms,
Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (2011) 8444e8451.
[5] M. Azuma, M. Watanabe, Electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide on
various metal electrodes in low-temperature aqueous KHCO3 media,
J. Electrochem. Soc. 137 (1990) 1772e1778.
[6] S. Bajracharya, A. ter Heijne, X.D. Benetton, K. Vanbroekhoven, C.J. Buisman,
D.P. Strik, D. Pant, Carbon dioxide reduction by mixed and pure cultures in
microbial electrosynthesis using an assembly of graphite felt and stainless
steel as a cathode, Bioresour. Technol. 195 (2015) 14e24.
[7] S.C. Barton, J. Gallaway, P. Atanassov, S. Calabrese Barton, J. Gallaway,
P. Atanassov, S.C. Barton, Enzymatic biofuel cells for implantable and
microscale devices, Chem. Rev. 104 (2004) 4867e4886, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1021/cr020719k.
[8] P. Batlle-Vilanova, S. Puig, R. Gonzalez-Olmos, M.D. Balaguer, J. Colprim,
Continuous acetate production through microbial electrosynthesis from CO2
with microbial mixed culture, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. (2015), http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.4657.
[9] A. Baudler, I. Schmidt, M. Langner, A. Greiner, U. Schroder, Does it have to be
carbon? Metal anodes in microbial fuel cells and related bioelectrochemical
systems, Energy Environ. Sci. 8 (2015) 2048e2055, http://dx.doi.org/

Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
10.1039/C5EE00866B.
[10] D.R. Bond, D.R. Lovley, Electricity production by Geobacter sulfurreducens
attached to electrodes, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69 (2003) 1548e1555,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.3.1548.
[11] D. Call, B.E. Logan, Hydrogen production in a single chamber microbial
electrolysis cell lacking a membrane, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008)
3401e3406.
[12] X. Cao, X. Huang, P. Liang, K. Xiao, Y. Zhou, X. Zhang, B.E. Logan, A new
method for water desalination using microbial desalination cells, Environ.
Sci. Technol. 43 (2009) 7148e7152, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es901950j.
[13] A.A. Carmona-Martínez, E. Trably, K. Milferstedt, R. Lacroix, L. Etcheverry,
N. Bernet, Long-term continuous production of H2 in a microbial electrolysis
cell (MEC) treating saline wastewater, Water Res. 81 (2015) 149e156.
[14] A.A. Carmona-Martinez, M. Pierra, E. Trably, N. Bernet, High current density
via direct electron transfer by the halophilic anode respiring bacterium
Geoalkalibacter subterraneus, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013)
19699e19707, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C3CP54045F.
[15] K.-J. Chae, M.-J. Choi, K.-Y. Kim, F.F. Ajayi, I.-S. Chang, I.S. Kim, A solar-
powered microbial electrolysis cell with a platinum catalyst-free cathode to
produce hydrogen, Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 (2009) 9525e9530, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es9022317.
[16] I.S. Chang, J.K. Jang, G.C. Gil, M. Kim, H.J. Kim, B.W. Cho, B.H. Kim, Continuous
determination of biochemical oxygen demand using microbial fuel cell type
biosensor, Biosens. Bioelectron. 19 (2004) 607e613, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S0956-5663(03)00272-0.
[17] I.S. Chang, H. Moon, J.K. Jang, B.H. Kim, Improvement of a microbial fuel cell
performance as a BOD sensor using respiratory inhibitors, Biosens. Bio-
electron. 20 (2005) 1856e1859, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.bios.2004.06.003.
[18] J.M. Chen, O.J. Hao, Microbial chromium (VI) reduction, Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 28 (1998) 219e251.
[19] S. Chen, G. He, Q. Liu, F. Harnisch, Y. Zhou, Y. Chen, M. Hanif, S. Wang,
X. Peng, H. Hou, U. Schro €der, Layered corrugated electrode macrostructures
boost microbial bioelectrocatalysis, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (2012)
9769e9772, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c2ee23344d.
[20] S. Chen, H. Hou, F. Harnisch, S. Patil, A. Carmona-Martinez, S. Agarwal,
Y. Zhang, S. Sinha-Ray, A.L. Yarin, A. Greiner, U. Schro € der, Electrospun and
solution blown three-dimensional carbon fiber nonwovens for application as
electrodes in microbial fuel cells, Energy Environ. Sci. 4 (2011) 1417e1421,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c0ee00446d.
[21] Y. Chen, Y. Xu, L. Chen, P. Li, S. Zhu, S. Shen, Microbial electrolysis cells with
polyaniline/multi-walled carbon nanotube-modified biocathodes, Energy 88
(2015) 377e384, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.05.057.
[22] K.Y. Cheng, G. Ho, R. Cord-Ruwisch, Novel methanogenic rotatable bio-
electrochemical system operated with polarity inversion, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 45 (2) (2010) 796e802.
[23] S. Cheng, H.V.M. Hamelers, B.E. Logan, D.F. Call, S. Cheng, H.V.M. Hamelers,
T.H.J.A. Sleutels, A.W. Jeremiasse, R.A. Rozendal, Critical review microbial
electrolysis cells for high yield hydrogen gas production from organic matter,
Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 8630e8640.
[24] S. Cheng, H. Liu, B.E. Logan, Increased performance of single-chamber mi-
crobial fuel cells using an improved cathode structure, Electrochem. Com-
mun. 8 (2006) 489e494, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2006.01.010.
[25] S. Cheng, B.E. Logan, High hydrogen production rate of microbial electrolysis
cell (MEC) with reduced electrode spacing, Bioresour. Technol. 102 (2011)
3571e3574, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.10.025.
[26] S. Cheng, D. Xing, D.F. Call, B.E. Logan, Direct biological conversion of elec-
trical current into methane by electromethanogenesis, Environ. Sci. Technol.
43 (2009) 3953e3958.
[27] P. Chiranjeevi, G. Mohanakrishna, S.V. Mohan, Rhizosphere mediated elec-
trogenesis with the function of anode placement for harnessing bioenergy
through CO2 sequestration, Bioresour. Technol. 124 (2012) 364e370.
[29] P. Clauwaert, D. van der Ha, N. Boon, K. Verbeken, M. Verhaege, K. Rabaey,
W. Verstraete, Open air biocathode enables effective electricity generation
with microbial fuel cells, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (2007) 7564e7569.
[30] P. Clauwaert, W. Verstraete, Methanogenesis in membraneless microbial
electrolysis cells, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 82 (5) (2009) 829e836.
[31] P. Colindres, H. Yee-Madeira, E. Reguera, Removal of Reactive Black 5 from
aqueous solution by ozone for water reuse in textile dyeing processes,
Desalination 258 (2010) 154e158.
[32] M.J. Cooney, V. Svoboda, C. Lau, G. Martin, S.D. Minteer, Enzyme catalysed
biofuel cells, Energy Environ. Sci. 1 (2008) 320e337.
[33] D. Cui, F.-Y. Kong, B. Liang, H.-Y. Cheng, D. Liu, Q. Sun, A.-J. Wang, Decolor-
ization of Azo dyes in dual-chamber biocatalyzed electrolysis systems
seeding with enriched inoculum, J. Environ. Anal. Toxicol. (2011). S3:001.
[34] R.D. Cusick, P.D. Kiely, B.E. Logan, A monetary comparison of energy recov-
ered from microbial fuel cells and microbial electrolysis cells fed winery or
domestic wastewaters, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010) 8855e8861, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.06.077.
[35] S.F. D'Souza, Microbial biosensors, Biosens. Bioelectron. 16 (2001) 337e353,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5663(01)00125-7.
[36] D. Da vila, J.P. Esquivel, N. Sabate, J. Mas, Silicon-based microfabricated mi-
crobial fuel cell toxicity sensor, Biosens. Bioelectron. 26 (2011) 2426e2430,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2010.10.025.
[37] J.B. Davis, H.F. Yarbrough, Preliminary experiments on a microbial fuel cell,
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
15
Science 137 (3530) (1962) 615e616.
[38] L. De Schamphelaire, W. Verstraete, Revival of the biological sunlight to
biogas energy conversion system, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 103 (2) (2009)
296e304.
[39] L. De Schamphelaire, A. Cabezas, M. Marzorati, M.W. Friedrich, N. Boon,
W. Verstraete, Microbial community analysis of anodes from sediment mi-
crobial fuel cells powered by rhizodeposits of living rice plants, Appl. Envi-
ron. Microbiol. 76 (2010) 2002e2008, http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02432-
09.
[40] Q. Deng, X. Li, J. Zuo, A. Ling, B.E. Logan, Power generation using an activated
carbon fiber felt cathode in an upflow microbial fuel cell, J. Power Sources
195 (2010) 1130e1135, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.08.092.
[41] J. Desloover, J.B. Arends, T. Hennebel, K. Rabaey, Operational and technical
considerations for microbial electrosynthesis, Biochem. Soc. Trans. 40 (2012)
1233e1238, http://dx.doi.org/10.1042/BST20120111.
[42] M. Di Lorenzo, A.R. Thomson, K. Schneider, P.J. Cameron, I. Ieropoulos,
A small-scale air-cathode microbial fuel cell for on-line monitoring of water
quality, Biosens. Bioelectron. 62 (2014) 182e188, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.bios.2014.06.050.
[43] T.D. DiStefano, J.M. Gossett, S.H. Zinder, Reductive dechlorination of high
concentrations of tetrachloroethene to ethene by an anaerobic enrichment
culture in the absence of methanogenesis, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 57
(1991) 2287e2292.
[44] C. Dumas, R. Basseguy, A. Bergel, DSA to grow electrochemically active bio-
films of Geobacter sulfurreducens, Electrochim. Acta 53 (2008a) 3200e3209,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2007.10.066.
[45] C. Dumas, R. Basseguy, A. Bergel, Electrochemical activity of Geobacter sul-
furreducens biofilms on stainless steel anodes, Electrochim. Acta 53 (2008b)
5235e5241, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2008.02.056.
[46] A. ElMekawy, H.M. Hegab, D. Pant, The near-future integration of microbial
desalination cells with reverse osmosis technology, Energy Environ. Sci. 7
(2014b) 3921e3933.
[47] A. ElMekawy, H.M. Hegab, K. Vanbroekhoven, D. Pant, Techno-productive
potential of photosynthetic microbial fuel cells through different configu-
rations, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 39 (2014a) 617e627.
[48] A. ElMekawy, S. Srikanth, S. Bajracharya, H.M. Hegab, P.S. Nigam, A. Singh, et
al., Food and agricultural wastes as substrates for bioelectrochemical system
(BES): the synchronized recovery of sustainable energy and waste treatment,
Food Res. Int. 73 (2015) 213e225.
[49] A. Escapa, X. Go mez, B. Tartakovsky, A. Mora n, Estimating microbial elec-
trolysis cell (MEC) investment costs in wastewater treatment plants: case
study, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37 (2012) 18641e18653, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.09.157.
[50] Y. Fan, S.-K. Han, H. Liu, Improved performance of CEA microbial fuel cells
with increased reactor size, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (2012) 8273e8280, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1039/c2ee21964f.
[51] Y. Fan, H. Hongqiang, H. Liu, Y. Fan, H. Hu, H. Liu, Sustainable power gen-
eration in microbial fuel cells using bicarbonate buffer and proton transfer
mechanisms, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (2007) 8154e8158, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1021/es071739c.
[52] Y. Fan, E. Sharbrough, H. Liu, Quantification of the internal resistance dis-
tribution of microbial fuel cells, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 8101e8107,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es801229j.
[53] Y. Feng, Q. Yang, X. Wang, B.E. Logan, Treatment of carbon fiber brush anodes
for improving power generation in airecathode microbial fuel cells, J. Power
Sources 195 (7) (2010) 1841e1844.
[54] V. Flexer, J. Chen, B.C. Donose, P. Sherrell, G.G. Wallace, J. Keller, The nano-
structure of three-dimensional scaffolds enhances the current density of
microbial bioelectrochemical systems, Energy Environ. Sci. 6 (2013)
1291e1298, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C3EE00052D.
[55] J.J. Fornero, M. Rosenbaum, L.T. Angenent, Electric power generation from
municipal, food, and animal wastewaters using microbial fuel cells, Elec-
troanalysis 22 (2010) 832e843, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/elan.200980011.
[56] S. Freguia, K. Rabaey, Z. Yuan, J. Keller, Non-catalyzed cathodic oxygen
reduction at graphite granules in microbial fuel cells, Electrochim. Acta 53
(2007) 598e603, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2007.07.037.
[57] Q. Fu, H. Kobayashi, Y. Kuramochi, J. Xu, T. Wakayama, H. Maeda, K. Sato,
Bioelectrochemical analyses of a thermophilic biocathode catalyzing sus-
tainable hydrogen production, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013)
15638e15645, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.04.116.
[58] R. Ganigue , S. Puig, P. Batlle-Vilanova, M.D. Balaguer, J. Colprim, Microbial
electrosynthesis of butyrate from carbon dioxide, Chem. Commun. 51 (2015)
3235e3238, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C4CC10121A.
[59] W. Gellett, M. Kesmez, J. Schumacher, N. Akers, S.D. Minteer, Biofuel cells for
portable power, Electroanalysis 22 (2010) 727e731, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/elan.200980013.
[60] Y. Gong, A. Ebrahim, A.M. Feist, M. Embree, T. Zhang, D. Lovley, K. Zengler,
Sulfide-driven microbial electrosynthesis, Environ. Sci. Technol. 47 (2013)
568e573, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es303837j.
[61] H. Gu, X. Zhang, Z. Li, L. Lei, Studies on treatment of chlorophenol-containing
wastewater by microbial fuel cell, Chin. Sci. Bull. 52 (2007) 3448e3451,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11434-007-0503-7.
[62] W. Habermann, E.H. Pommer, Biological fuel cells with sulphide storage
capacity, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 35 (1991) 128e133.
[63] H.V. Hamelers, A. Ter Heijne, T.H. Sleutels, A.W. Jeremiasse, D.P. Strik,
16 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
C.J. Buisman, New applications and performance of bioelectrochemical sys-
tems, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 85 (6) (2010) 1673e1685.
[64] F. Harnisch, U. Schro € der, From MFC to MXC: chemical and biological cath-
odes and their potential for microbial bioelectrochemical systems, Chem.
Soc. Rev. 39 (11) (2010) 4433e4448.
[65] S. Hays, F. Zhang, B.E. Logan, Performance of two different types of anodes in
membrane electrode assembly microbial fuel cells for power generation
from domestic wastewater, J. Power Sources 196 (2011) 8293e8300, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2011.06.027.
[66] J. He, Y. Sung, M.E. Dollhopf, B.Z. Fathepure, J.M. Tiedje, F.E. Lo € ffler, Acetate
versus hydrogen as direct electron donors to stimulate the microbial
reductive dechlorination process at chloroethene-contaminated sites, Envi-
ron. Sci. Technol. 36 (2002) 3945e3952.
[67] E.S. Heidrich, S.R. Edwards, J. Dolfing, S.E. Cotterill, T.P. Curtis, Performance of
a pilot scale microbial electrolysis cell fed on domestic wastewater at
ambient temperatures for a 12 month period, Bioresour. Technol. 173 (2014)
87e95, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.09.083.
[68] A.Ter Heijne, F. Liu, R.V.D. Weijden, J. Weijma, C.J. Buisman, H.V. Hamelers,
Copper recovery combined with electricity production in a microbial fuel
cell, Environ. Sci. Technol. 44 (11) (2010) 4376e4381.
[69] M. Helder, D.P. Strik, H.V. Hamelers, C.J. Buisman, The flat-plate plant-mi-
crobial fuel cell: the effect of a new design on internal resistances, Bio-
technol. Biofuels 5 (1) (2012) 1e11.
[70] J. Hou, Z. Liu, Y. Li, S. Yang, Y. Zhou, A comparative study of graphene-coated
stainless steel fiber felt and carbon cloth as anodes in MFCs, Bioprocess
Biosyst. Eng. 38 (2015) 881e888, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00449-014-
1332-0.
[71] H. Hu, Y. Fan, H. Liu, Hydrogen production in single-chamber tubular mi-
crobial electrolysis cells using non-precious-metal catalysts, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 34 (2009) 8535e8542.
[72] H. Hu, Y. Fan, H. Liu, Optimization of NiMo catalyst for hydrogen production
in microbial electrolysis cells, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010) 3227e3233.
[73] L. Huang, X. Chai, S. Cheng, G. Chen, Evaluation of carbon-based materials in
tubular biocathode microbial fuel cells in terms of hexavalent chromium
reduction and electricity generation, Chem. Eng. J. 166 (2011a) 652e661.
[74] L. Huang, S. Cheng, G. Chen, Bioelectrochemical systems for efficient recal-
citrant wastes treatment, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 86 (2011b) 481e491,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2551.
[75] I. Ieropoulos, J. Greenman, C. Melhuish, Microbial fuel cells based on carbon
veil electrodes: Stack configuration and scalability, Int. J. Energy Res. 32
(2008) 1228e1240, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.1419.
[76] K.S. Jacobson, D.M. Drew, Z. He, Use of a liter-scale microbial desalination cell
as a platform to study bioelectrochemical desalination with salt solution or
artificial seawater, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (2011) 4652e4657, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es200127p.
[78] A.W. Jeremiasse, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.J.N. Buisman, Microbial electrolysis cell
with a microbial biocathode, Bioelectrochem 78 (2010a) 39e43, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2009.05.005.
[79] A.W. Jeremiasse, H.V.M. Hamelers, E. Croese, C.J.N. Buisman, Acetate en-
hances startup of a H2 producing microbial biocathode, Biotechnol. Bioeng.
109 (2012) 657e664, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.24338.
[80] A.W. Jeremiasse, H.V.M. Hamelers, M. Saakes, C.J.N. Buisman, Ni foam cath-
ode enables high volumetric H2 production in a microbial electrolysis cell,
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010b) 12716e12723, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2010.08.131.
[81] Y. Jiang, M. Su, Y. Zhang, G. Zhan, Y. Tao, D. Li, Bioelectrochemical systems for
simultaneously production of methane and acetate from carbon dioxide at
relatively high rate, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013) 3497e3502, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.12.107.
[82] L. Jourdin, S. Freguia, B.C. Donose, J. Keller, Autotrophic hydrogen-producing
biofilm growth sustained by a cathode as the sole electron and energy
source, Bioelectrochem 102 (2015) 56e63, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.bioelechem.2014.12.001.
[83] Y. Kamitaka, S. Tsujimura, N. Setoyama, T. Kajino, K. Kano, Fructose/dioxygen
biofuel cell based on direct electron transfer-type bioelectrocatalysis, Phys.
Chem. Chem. Phys. 9 (2007) 1793e1801, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/
b617650j.
[84] R. Karthikeyan, B. Wang, J. Xuan, J.W.C. Wong, P.K.H. Lee, M.K.H. Leung,
Interfacial electron transfer and bioelectrocatalysis of carbonized plant ma-
terial as effective anode of microbial fuel cell, Electrochim. Acta 157 (2015)
314e323, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2015.01.029.
[85] S.F. Ketep, A. Bergel, A. Calmet, B. Erable, Stainless steel foam increases the
current produced by microbial bioanodes in bioelectrochemical systems,
Energy Environ. Sci. 7 (2014) 1633e1637, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/
C3EE44114H.
[86] P.D. Kiely, J.M. Regan, B.E. Logan, The electric picnic: synergistic re-
quirements for exoelectrogenic microbial communities, Curr. Opin. Bio-
technol. 22 (2011) 378e385, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2011.03.003.
[87] B.H. Kim, I.S. Chang, G.C. Gil, H.S. Park, H.J. Kim, G. Cheol Gil, H.S. Park,
H.J. Kim, Novel BOD (biological oxygen demand) sensor using mediator-less
microbial fuel cell, Biotechnol. Lett. 25 (2003) 541e545, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1023/A:1022891231369.
[88] M. Kim, M. Sik Hyun, G.M. Gadd, H. Joo Kim, A novel biomonitoring system
using microbial fuel cells, J. Environ. Monit. 9 (2007) 1323e1328, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1039/B713114C.
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
[89] A.N. Kumar, C.N. Reddy, S.V. Mohan, Biomineralization of azo dye bearing
wastewater in periodic discontinuous batch reactor: effect of micro-
aerophilic conditions on treatment efficiency, Bioresour. Technol. 188 (2015)
56e64.

[90] P. Kuntke, K.M. Smiech, H. Bruning, G. Zeeman, M. Saakes, T.H.J.A. Sleutels,
C.J.N. Buisman, Ammonium recovery and energy production from urine by a
microbial fuel cell, Water Res. 46 (8) (2012) 2627e2636.
[91] H. Li, P.H. Opgenorth, D.G. Wernick, S. Rogers, T.-Y. Wu, W. Higashide,
P. Malati, Y.-X. Huo, K.M. Cho, J.C. Liao, Integrated electromicrobial conver-
sion of CO2 to higher alcohols, Science 335 (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/
science.1217643, 1596e1596.
[92] B. Liu, Y. Lei, B. Li, A batch-mode cube microbial fuel cell based “shock”
biosensor for wastewater quality monitoring, Biosens. Bioelectron. 62 (2014)
308e314, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2014.06.051.
[94] H. Liu, B.E. Logan, Electricity generation using an air-cathode single chamber
microbial fuel cell in the presence and absence of a proton exchange
membrane, Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 (2004) 4040e4046.
[95] L. Liu, Y. Yuan, F. Li, C. Feng, In-situ Cr(VI) reduction with electrogenerated
hydrogen peroxide driven by iron-reducing bacteria, Bioresour. Technol. 102
(2011) 2468e2473.
[96] F.E. Lo€ ffler, Q. Sun, J. Li, J.M. Tiedje, 16S rRNA gene-based detection of
tetrachloroethene-dechlorinating Desulfuromonas and Dehalococcoides Spe-
cies, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66 (2000) 1369e1374.
[97] B.E. Logan, Extracting hydrogen and electricity from renewable resources,
Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 (2004) 160Ae167A.
[98] B.E. Logan, D. Call, S. Cheng, H.V.M. Hamelers, T.H.J.A. Sleutels,
A.W. Jeremiasse, R.A. Rozendal, Microbial electrolysis cells for high yield
hydrogen gas production from organic matter, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42
(2008) 8630e8640.
[99] B.E. Logan, B. Hamelers, R. Rozendal, U. Schro €der, J. Keller, S. Freguia,
P. Aelterman, W. Verstraete, K. Rabaey, Microbial fuel cells: methodology
and technology, Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (2006) 5181e5192.
[100] B. Logan, S. Cheng, V. Watson, G. Estadt, Graphite fiber brush anodes for
increased power production in air-cathode microbial fuel cells, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 41 (2007) 3341e3346, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es062644y.
[101] B.E. Logan, Exoelectrogenic bacteria that power microbial fuel cells, Nat.
Rev. Microbiol. 7 (2009) 375e381, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2113.
[102] B.E. Logan, C. Murano, K. Scott, N.D. Gray, I.M. Head, Electricity generation
from cysteine in a microbial fuel cell, Water Res. 39 (2005) 942e952, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.11.019.
[103] B.E. Logan, K. Rabaey, Conversion of wastes into bioelectricity and chemicals
by using microbial electrochemical technologies, Science 337 (2012)
686e690, http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1217412.
[105] D.R. Lovley, Anaerobes to the rescue, Sci. (80) 293 (2001) 1444e1446.
[106] H. Luo, P.E. Jenkins, Z. Ren, Concurrent desalination and hydrogen generation
using microbial electrolysis and desalination cells, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45
(2011) 340e344, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es1022202.
[107] H. Luo, P. Xu, T.M. Roane, P.E. Jenkins, Z. Ren, Microbial desalination cells for
improved performance in wastewater treatment, electricity production, and
desalination, Bioresour. Technol. 105 (2012) 60e66, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.biortech.2011.11.098.
[108] Y. Luo, F. Zhang, B. Wei, G. Liu, R. Zhang, B.E. Logan, The use of cloth fabric
diffusion layers for scalable microbial fuel cells, Biochem. Eng. J. 73 (2013)
49e52, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2013.01.011.
[109] K.S. Madiraju, D. Lyew, R. Kok, V. Raghavan, Carbon neutral electricity pro-
duction by Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 in a microbial fuel cell, Bioresour.
Technol. 110 (2012) 214e218, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2012.01.065.
[110] M.F. Manuel, V. Neburchilov, H. Wang, S.R. Guiot, B. Tartakovsky, Hydrogen
production in a microbial electrolysis cell with nickel-based gas diffusion
cathodes, J. Power Sources 195 (2010) 5514e5519.
[111] M. Marcucci, G. Ciardelli, A. Matteucci, L. Ranieri, M. Russo, Experimental
campaigns on textile wastewater for reuse by means of different membrane
processes, Desalination 149 (2002) 137e143.
[112] C.W. Marshall, D.E. Ross, E.B. Fichot, R.S. Norman, H.D. May, Electrosynthesis
of commodity chemicals by an autotrophic microbial community, Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 78 (23) (2012) 8412e8420.
[113] C.W. Marshall, E.V. LaBelle, H.D. May, Production of fuels and chemicals from
waste by microbiomes, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 24 (2013a) 1e7, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2013.03.016.
[114] C.W. Marshall, D.E. Ross, E.B. Fichot, R.S. Norman, H.D. May, Long-term
operation of microbial electrosynthesis systems improves acetate production
by autotrophic microbiomes, Environ. Sci. Technol. 47 (2013b) 6023e6029,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es400341b.
[115] D. Massazza, R. Parra, J.P. Busalmen, H.E. Romeo, New ceramic electrodes
allow reaching the target current density in bioelectrochemical systems,
Energy Environ. Sci. 8 (2015) 2707e2712, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/
C5EE01498K.
[116] P.L. McCarty, J. Bae, J. Kim, Domestic wastewater treatment as a net energy
producerecan this be achieved? Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (2011) 7100e7106,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es2014264.
[117] M. Mehanna, P.D. Kiely, D.F. Call, B.E. Logan, Microbial electrodialysis cell for
simultaneous water desalination and hydrogen gas production, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 44 (2010) 9578e9583, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es1025646.
[118] S.D. Minteer, B.Y. Liaw, M.J. Cooney, Enzyme-based biofuel cells, Curr. Opin.
 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
Biotechnol. 18 (2007) 228e234, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.copbio.2007.03.007.
[119] O. Modin, X. Wang, X. Wu, S. Rauch, K.K. Fedje, Bioelectrochemical recovery
of Cu, Pb, Cd, and Zn from dilute solutions, J. Hazard. Mater. 235e236 (2012)
291e297, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.07.058.
[120] S.V. Mohan, M.L. Babu, M.V. Reddy, G. Mohanakrishna, P.N. Sarma, Har-
nessing of biohydrogen by acidogenic fermentation of Citrus limetta peel-
ings: Effect of extraction procedure and pretreatment of biocatalyst, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 34 (15) (2009) 6149e6156.
[121] S.V. Mohan, P. Chiranjeevi, G. Mohanakrishna, A rapid and simple protocol
for evaluating biohydrogen production potential (BHP) of wastewater with
simultaneous process optimization, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37 (4) (2012)
3130e3141.
[122] S.V. Mohan, G. Mohanakrishna, G. Velvizhi, V.L. Babu, P.N. Sarma, Bio-cata-
lyzed electrochemical treatment of real field dairy wastewater with simul-
taneous power generation, Biochem. Eng. J. 51 (1) (2010) 32e39.
[123] G. Mohanakrishna, S.K. Mohan, S.V. Mohan, Carbon based nanotubes and
nanopowder as impregnated electrode structures for enhanced power
generation: Evaluation with real field wastewater, Appl. Energy 95 (2012)
31e37.
[124] G. Mohanakrishna, S.V. Mohan, P.N. Sarma, Bio-electrochemical treatment of
distillery wastewater in microbial fuel cell facilitating decolorization and
desalination along with power generation, J. Hazard. Mater. 177 (1) (2010)
487e494.
[125] G. Mohanakrishna, J.S. Seelam, K. Vanbroekhoven, D. Pant, An enriched
electroactive homoacetogenic biocathode for the microbial electrosynthesis
of acetate through carbon dioxide reduction, Faraday Discuss. 183 (2015)
445e462.
[126] N. Montpart, L. Rago, J.A. Baeza, A. Guisasola, Hydrogen production in single
chamber microbial electrolysis cells with different complex substrates,
Water Res. 68 (2015) 601e615, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.watres.2014.10.026.
[127] Y. Mu, K. Rabaey, R.A. Rozendal, Z. Yuan, J. Keller, Decolorization of azo dyes
in bioelectrochemical systems, Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 (13) (2009)
5137e5143.
[128] J.-Y. Nam, J.C. Tokash, B.E. Logan, Comparison of microbial electrolysis cells
operated with added voltage or by setting the anode potential, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 36 (2011) 10550e10556, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2011.05.148.
[129] K.P. Nevin, S.A. Hensley, A.E. Franks, Z.M. Summers, J. Ou, T.L. Woodard,
O.L. Snoeyenbos-West, D.R. Lovley, Electrosynthesis of organic compounds
from carbon dioxide is catalyzed by a diversity of acetogenic microorgan-
isms, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77 (2011) 2882e2886, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1128/AEM.02642-10.
[130] K.P. Nevin, T.L. Woodard, A.E. Franks, Z.M. Summers, D.R. Lovley, Microbial
electrosynthesis: feeding microbes electricity to convert carbon dioxide and
water to multicarbon extracellular organic compounds, MBio 1 (2010),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00103-10 e00103e10.
[131] S.E. Nybo, N. Khan, B.M. Woolston, W.R. Curtis, Metabolic engineering in
chemolithoautotrophic hosts for the production of fuels and chemicals,
Metab. Eng 30 (2015) 105e120.
[132] R. Palmore, G. Tayhas, M.,G. Whitesides, G.T.R. Palmore, G.M. Whitesides,
Microbial and enzymatic biofuel cells, Enzym. Convers. Biomass Fuels Prod.
(1994) 271e290, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/bk-1994-0566.ch014.
[133] P. Pandey, V.N. Shinde, R.L. Deopurkar, S.P. Kale, S.A. Patil, D. Pant, Recent
advances in the use of different substrates in microbial fuel cells toward
wastewater treatment and simultaneous energy recovery, Appl. Energy 168
(2016) 706e723.
[134] D. Pant, G. Van Bogaert, L. Diels, K. Vanbroekhoven, A review of the sub-
strates used in microbial fuel cells (MFCs) for sustainable energy production,
Bioresour. Technol. 101 (2010) 1533e1543, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2009.10.017.
[136] S.B. Pasupuleti, S. Srikanth, S.V. Mohan, D. Pant, Development of exoelec-
trogenic bioanode and study on feasibility of hydrogen production using
abiotic VITO-CoRE™ and VITO-CASE™ electrodes in a single chamber mi-
crobial electrolysis cell (MEC) at low current densities, Bioresour. Technol.
195 (2015) 131e138.
[137] S.A. Patil, S. Gildemyn, D. Pant, K. Zengler, B.E. Logan, K. Rabaey, A logical
data representation framework for electricity-driven bioproduction pro-
cesses, Biotechnol. Adv. 33 (2015) 736e744.
[138] H. Pham, N. Boon, M. Marzorati, W. Verstraete, Enhanced removal of 1,2-
dichloroethane by anodophilic microbial consortia, Water Res. 43 (2009)
2936e2946, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2009.04.004.
[139] D. Pocaznoi, B. Erable, M.-L. Delia, A. Bergel, Ultra microelectrodes increase
the current density provided by electroactive biofilms by improving their
electron transport ability, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (2012) 5287e5296, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1039/c1ee01469b.
[140] M.C. Potter, Electrical effects accompanying the decomposition of organic
compounds, in: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Con-
taining Papers of a Biological Character, 1911, pp. 260e276.
[142] K. Rabaey, S. Bützer, S. Brown, J. Keller, R.A. Rozendal, High current gener-
ation coupled to caustic production using a lamellar bioelectrochemical
system, Environ. Sci. Technol. 44 (2010) 4315e4321, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1021/es9037963.
[143] K. Rabaey, P. Girguis, L.K. Nielsen, Metabolic and practical considerations on
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
17
microbial electrosynthesis, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 22 (2011) 371e377,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2011.01.010.
[144] K. Rabaey, R.A. Rozendal, Microbial electrosynthesis d revisiting the elec-
trical route for microbial production.pdf, Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 8 (2010)
706e716, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2422.
[145] K. Rabaey, K. Van de Sompel, L. Maignien, N. Boon, P. Aelterman,
P. Clauwaert, L. De Schamphelaire, H.T. Pham, J. Vermeulen, M. Verhaege,
P. Lens, W. Verstraete, Microbial fuel cells for sulfide removal, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 40 (2006) 5218e5224.
[146] G.K. Rader, B.E. Logan, Multi-electrode continuous flow microbial electrolysis
cell for biogas production from acetate, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (17)
(2010) 8848e8854.
[147] G. Resch, A. Held, T. Faber, C. Panzer, F. Toro, R. Haas, Potentials and pros-
pects for renewable energies at global scale, Energy Policy 36 (2008)
4048e4056, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.029.
[150] M. Rosenbaum, U. Schro € der, F. Scholz, Investigation of the electrocatalytic
oxidation of formate and ethanol at platinum black under microbial fuel cell
conditions, J. Solid State Electrochem. 10 (2006) 872e878, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10008-006-0167-2.
[151] R. Rousseau, X. Dominguez-Benetton, M.-L. De lia, A. Bergel, Microbial bio-
anodes with high salinity tolerance for microbial fuel cells and microbial
electrolysis cells, Electrochem. Commun. 33 (2013) 1e4, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.elecom.2013.04.002.
[152] R.A. Rozendal, C.J.N Buisman. 2005. Bio-Electrochemical Process for Pro-
ducing Hydrogen. Patent WO/2005/005981.
[154] R.A. Rozendal, H.V.M. Hamelers, G.J.M. Euverink, S.J. Metz, C.J.N. Buisman,
Principle and perspectives of hydrogen production through biocatalyzed
electrolysis, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 31 (2006) 1632e1640.
[155] R.A. Rozendal, H.V. Hamelers, R.J. Molenkamp, C.J. Buisman, Performance of
single chamber biocatalyzed electrolysis with different types of ion exchange
membranes, Water Res. 41 (9) (2007) 1984e1994.
[156] R.A. Rozendal, F. Harnisch, A.W. Jeremiasse, U. Schro €der, Chemically cata-
lyzed cathodes in bioelectrochemical systems, in: K. Rabaey, L. Angenent,
U. Schro€der, J. Keller (Eds.), Bioelectrochemical Systems: from Extracellular
Electron Transfer to Biotechnological Application, IWA Publishing, London,
2010.
[157] R.A. Rozendal, A.W. Jeremiasse, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.J.N. Buisman, Hydrogen
production with a microbial biocathode, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008)
629e634, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es071720þ.
[158] R.A. Rozendal, E. Leone, J. Keller, K. Rabaey, Efficient hydrogen peroxide
generation from organic matter in a bioelectrochemical system, Electro-
chem. Commun. 11 (2009) 1752e1755, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.elecom.2009.07.008.
[161] K. Sasaki, S.I. Hirano, M. Morita, D. Sasaki, N. Matsumoto, N. Ohmura,
Y. Igarashi, Bioelectrochemical system accelerates microbial growth and
degradation of filter paper, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 89 (2) (2011)
449e455.
[162] P.A. Selembo, M.D. Merrill, B.E. Logan, The use of stainless steel and nickel
alloys as low-cost cathodes in microbial electrolysis cells, J. Power Sources
190 (2009) 271e278.
[163] P.A. Selembo, M.D. Merrill, B.E. Logan, Hydrogen production with nickel
powder cathode catalysts in microbial electrolysis cells, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 35 (2010) 428e437.
[164] K. Selvam, K. Swaminathan, K.-S. Chae, Microbial decolorization of azo dyes
and dye industry effluent by Fomes lividus, World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 19
(2003) 591e593.
[165] R. Seshadri, L. Adrian, D.E. Fouts, J.A. Eisen, A.M. Phillippy, B.A. Methe,
N.L. Ward, W.C. Nelson, R.T. Deboy, H.M. Khouri, et al., Genome sequence of
the PCEdechlorinating bacterium Dehalococcoides ethenogenes, Science 307
(5706) (2005) 105e108.
[166] M. Sharma, N. Aryal, P.M. Sarma, K. Vanbroekhoven, B. Lal, X.D. Benetton,
D. Pant, Bioelectrocatalyzed reduction of acetic and butyric acids via direct
electron transfer using a mixed culture of sulfate-reducers drives electro-
synthesis of alcohols and acetone, Chem. Commun. (Camb) 49 (2013)
6495e6497, http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c3cc42570c.
[167] M. Sharma, S. Bajracharya, S. Gildemyn, S.A. Patil, Y. Alvarez-Gallego, D. Pant,
X. Dominguez-Benetton, A critical revisit of the key parameters used to
describe microbial electrochemical systems, Electrochim. Acta 140 (2014)
191e208.
[168] M. Sharma, P.M. Sarma, D. Pant, X. Dominguez-Benetton, Optimization of
electrochemical parameters for sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) based bio-
cathode, RSC Adv. 5 (49) (2015) 39601e39611.
[169] A. Singh, S. Sevda, I.M. Abu Reesh, K. Vanbroekhoven, D. Rathore, D. Pant,
Biohydrogen production from lignocellulosic biomass: technology and sus-
tainability, Energies 8 (11) (2015) 13062e13080.
[170] T.H.J. Sleutels, A. ter Heijne, C.J.N. Buisman, H.V.M. Hamelers, Bio-
electrochemical systems: an outlook for practical applications, Chem-
SusChem 5 (2012) 1012e1019, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cssc.201100732.
[171] T.H.J. Sleutels, A. ter Heijne, C.J.N. Buisman, H.V.M. Hamelers, Steady-state
performance and chemical efficiency of microbial electrolysis cells, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013) 7201e7208, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2013.04.067.
[172] T.H.J. Sleutels, R. Lodder, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.J.N. Buisman, Improved per-
formance of porous bio-anodes in microbial electrolysis cells by enhancing
mass and charge transport, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 9655e9661,
18 S. Bajracharya et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2016) 1e18
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.09.089.
[173] O. Sosa-Hern andez, S.C. Popat, P. Parameswaran, G.S. Alem an-Nava,
n, R. Parra-Saldívar, Application of microbial electrolysis
C.I. Torres, G. Buitro
cells to treat spent yeast from an alcoholic fermentation, Bioresour. Technol.
200 (2016) 342e349, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.10.053.
[175] S. Srikanth, M. Maesen, X. Dominguez-Benetton, K. Vanbroekhoven, D. Pant,
Enzymatic electrosynthesis of formate through CO2 sequestration/reduction
in a bioelectrochemical system (BES), Bioresour. Technol. 165 (2014)
350e354.
[176] N.E. Stein, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.N.J. Buisman, Stabilizing the baseline current
of a microbial fuel cell-based biosensor through overpotential control under
non-toxic conditions, Bioelectrochem 78 (2010) 87e91, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.bioelechem.2009.09.009.
[177] N.E. Stein, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.N.J. Buisman, The effect of different control
mechanisms on the sensitivity and recovery time of a microbial fuel cell
based biosensor, Sens. Actuators B Chem. 171e172 (2012a) 816e821, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2012.05.076.
[178] N.E. Stein, H.V.M. Hamelers, G. van Straten, K.J. Keesman, Effect of toxic
components on microbial fuel cell-polarization curves and estimation of the
type of toxic inhibition, Biosensors 2 (2012b) 255e268.
[179] K.J.J. Steinbusch, H.V.M. Hamelers, J.D. Schaap, C. Kampman, C.J.N. Buisman,
Bioelectrochemical ethanol production through mediated acetate reduction
by mixed cultures, Environ. Sci. Technol. 44 (2010) 513e517, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es902371e.
[180] D.P.B.T.B. Strik, H.V.M.H. Bert, J.F.H. Snel, C.J.N. Buisman, Green electricity
production with living plants and bacteria in a fuel cell, Int. J. Energy Res.
(2008a), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.
[181] D.P.B.T.B. Strik, H. Terlouw, H.V.M. Hamelers, C.J.N. Buisman, Renewable
sustainable biocatalyzed electricity production in a photosynthetic algal
microbial fuel cell (PAMFC), Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 81 (2008b)
659e668, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00253-008-1679-8.
[182] D.P.B.T.B. Strik, R.A. Timmers, M. Helder, K.J.J. Steinbusch, H.V.M. Hamelers,
C.J.N. Buisman, Microbial solar cells: applying photosynthetic and electro-
chemically active organisms, Trends Biotechnol. 29 (2011) 41e49, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2010.10.001.
[183] S.M. Strycharz, S.M. Gannon, A.R. Boles, A.E. Franks, K.P. Nevin, D.R. Lovley,
Reductive dechlorination of 2-chlorophenol by Anaeromyxobacter dehalo-
genans with an electrode serving as the electron donor, Environ. Microbiol.
Rep. 2 (2010) 289e294, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-
2229.2009.00118.x.
[184] S.M. Strycharz, T.L. Woodard, J.P. Johnson, K.P. Nevin, R.A. Sanford,
F.E. Lo€ ffler, D.R. Lovley, F.E. Loffler, Graphite electrode as a sole electron
donor for reductive dechlorination of tetrachloroethene by Geobacter lovleyi,
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 74 (2008) 5943e5947.
[185] L. Su, W. Jia, C. Hou, Y. Lei, Microbial biosensors: a review, Biosens. Bio-
electron. 26 (2011) 1788e1799, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.bios.2010.09.005.
[186] J. Sun, Y. Hu, Z. Bi, Y. Cao, Simultaneous decolorization of azo dye and
bioelectricity generation using a microfiltration membrane air-cathode sin-
gle-chamber microbial fuel cell, Bioresour. Technol. 100 (2009) 3185e3192.
[187] M. Tandukar, S.J. Huber, T. Onodera, S.G. Pavlostathis, Biological chro-
mium(VI) reduction in the cathode of a microbial fuel cell, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 43 (2009) 8159e8165.
[188] B. Tartakovsky, M. Manuel, H. Wang, S. Guiot, High rate membrane-less
microbial electrolysis cell for continuous hydrogen production, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 672e677, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2008.11.003.
[189] A. ter Heijne, H.V.M. Hamelers, M. Saakes, C.J.N. Buisman, Performance of
non-porous graphite and titanium-based anodes in microbial fuel cells,
Electrochim. Acta 53 (2008) 5697e5703, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.electacta.2008.03.032.
[191] R.A. Timmers, D.P.B.T.B. Strik, C. Arampatzoglou, C.J.N. Buisman,
H.V.M. Hamelers, Rhizosphere anode model explains high oxygen levels
during operation of a Glyceria maxima PMFC, Bioresour. Technol. 108 (2012)
60e67, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.10.088.
[192] G. de A. Umbuzeiro, H.S. Freeman, S.H. Warren, D.P. de Oliveira, Y. Terao,
T. Watanabe, L.D. Claxton, The contribution of azo dyes to the mutagenic
activity of the Cristais River, Chemosphere 60 (2005) 55e64.
[193] F.P. van der Zee, I.A.E. Bisschops, G. Lettinga, J.A. Field, Activated carbon as an
electron acceptor and redox mediator during the anaerobic biotransforma-
tion of azo dyes, Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (2002) 402e408.
[194] W. Verstraete, K. Rabaey, Critical review microbial fuel cells, Methodol.
Technol. 40 (2006) 5181e5192.
[195] M. Villano, F. Aulenta, C. Ciucci, T. Ferri, A. Giuliano, M. Majone, Bio-
electrochemical reduction of CO2 to CH4 via direct and indirect extracellular
electron transfer by a hydrogenophilic methanogenic culture, Bioresour.
Technol. 101 (2010) 3085e3090.
[196] M. Villano, G. Monaco, F. Aulenta, M. Majone, Electrochemically assisted
methane production in a biofilm reactor, J. Power Sources 196 (22) (2011)
9467e9472.
[197] R.C. Wagner, J.M. Regan, S.E. Oh, Y. Zuo, B.E. Logan, Hydrogen and methane
production from swine wastewater using microbial electrolysis cells, Water
Res. 43 (5) (2009) 1480e1488.
[198] A. Wang, D. Sun, G. Cao, H. Wang, N. Ren, W. Wu, B.E. Logan, Integrated hydrogen
production process from cellulose by combining dark fermentation, microbial
Please cite this article in press as: S. Bajracharya, et al., An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs): Technology for sustainable
electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond, Renewable Energy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.03.002
fuel cells, and a microbial electrolysis cell, Bioresour. Technol. 102 (2011)
4137e4143, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.10.137.
[199] G. Wang, L. Huang, Y. Zhang, Cathodic reduction of hexavalent chromium
[Cr(VI)] coupled with electricity generation in microbial fuel cells, Bio-
technol. Lett. 30 (2008) 1959e1966.
[200] H. Wang, D. Liu, L. Lu, Z. Zhao, Y. Xu, F. Cui, Degradation of algal organic
matter using microbial fuel cells and its association with trihalomethane
precursor removal, Bioresour. Technol. 116 (2012) 80e85, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.biortech.2012.04.021.
[201] Q. Wen, S. Wang, J. Yan, L. Cong, Z. Pan, Y. Ren, Z. Fan, MnO2egraphene
hybrid as an alternative cathodic catalyst to platinum in microbial fuel cells,
J. Power Sources 216 (2012) 187e191, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jpowsour.2012.05.023.
[202] K. Wetser, E. Sudirjo, C.J.N. Buisman, D.P.B.T.B. Strik, Electricity generation by
a plant microbial fuel cell with an integrated oxygen reducing biocathode,
Appl. Energy 137 (2015) 151e157.
[203] J. Winfield, I. Ieropoulos, J. Greenman, Investigating a cascade of seven hy-
draulically connected microbial fuel cells, Bioresour. Technol. 110 (2012)
245e250, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.095.
[204] N. Xafenias, M.O. Anunobi, V. Mapelli, Electrochemical startup increases 1, 3-
propanediol titers in mixed-culture glycerol fermentations, Proc. Biochem.
50 (10) (2015) 1499e1508.
[205] L. Xiao, J. Damien, J. Luo, H.D. Jang, J. Huang, Z. He, Crumpled graphene
particles for microbial fuel cell electrodes, J. Power Sources 208 (2012)
187e192, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.02.036.
[206] D. Xing, Y. Zuo, S. Cheng, J.M. Regan, B.E. Logan, Electricity generation by
Rhodopseudomonas palustris DX-1, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008)
4146e4151.
[207] T. Yakushi, K. Matsushita, Alcohol dehydrogenase of acetic acid bacteria:
structure, mode of action, and applications in biotechnology, Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 86 (2010) 1257e1265, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00253-010-
2529-z.
[208] X. Yang, W. Zou, Y. Su, Y. Zhu, H. Jiang, J. Shen, C. Li, Activated nitrogen-
doped carbon nanofibers with hierarchical pore as efficient oxygen reduc-
tion reaction catalyst for microbial fuel cells, J. Power Sources 266 (2014)
36e42, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.04.126.
[209] Y. Yang, P.L. McCarty, Competition for hydrogen within a chlorinated solvent
dehalogenating anaerobic mixed culture, Environ. Sci. Technol. 32 (1998)
3591e3597.
[210] S.-J. You, N.-Q. Ren, Q.-L. Zhao, J.-Y. Wang, F.-L. Yang, Power generation and
electrochemical analysis of biocathode microbial fuel cell using graphite
fibre brush as cathode material, Fuel Cells 9 (2009) 588e596.
[211] M.N. Zafar, N. Beden, D. Leech, C. Sygmund, R. Ludwig, L. Gorton, Charac-
terization of different FAD-dependent glucose dehydrogenases for possible
use in glucose-based biosensors and biofuel cells, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 402
(2012) 2069e2077, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-011-5650-7.
[212] B. Zhang, C. Feng, J. Ni, J. Zhang, W. Huang, Simultaneous reduction of va-
nadium (V) and chromium (VI) with enhanced energy recovery based on
microbial fuel cell technology, J. Power Sources 204 (2012a) 34e39.
[213] F. Zhang, T. Saito, S. Cheng, M.A. Hickner, B.E. Logan, Microbial fuel cell
cathodes with poly(dimethylsiloxane) diffusion layers constructed around
stainless steel mesh current collectors, Environ. Sci. Technol. 44 (2010)
1490e1495, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es903009d.
[214] L.J. Zhang, H.C. Tao, X.Y. Wei, T. Lei, J.B. Li, A.J. Wang, et al., Bio-
electrochemical recovery of ammonia-copper(II) complexes from waste-
water using a dual chamber microbial fuel cell, Chemosphere 89 (2012b)
1177e1182, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.08.011.
[215] L. Zhang, C. Liu, L. Zhuang, W. Li, S. Zhou, J. Zhang, Manganese dioxide as an
alternative cathodic catalyst to platinum in microbial fuel cells, Biosens.
Bioelectron. 24 (2009) 2825e2829, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.bios.2009.02.010.
[216] L. Zhang, S. Zhou, L. Zhuang, W. Li, J. Zhang, N. Lu, L. Deng, Microbial fuel cell
based on Klebsiella pneumoniae biofilm, Electrochem. Commun. 10 (2008)
1641e1643, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2008.08.030.
[217] X. Zhang, D. Pant, F. Zhang, J. Liu, W. He, B.E. Logan, Long-term performance
of chemically and physically modified activated carbons in air cathodes of
microbial fuel cells, ChemElectroChem 1 (11) (2014) 1859e1866.
[218] Y. Zhang, I. Angelidaki, Submersible microbial fuel cell sensor for monitoring
microbial activity and BOD in groundwater: focusing on impact of anodic
biofilm on sensor applicability, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 108 (2011) 2339e2347,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bit.23204.
[219] F. Zhao, N. Rahunen, J.R. Varcoe, A. Chandra, C. Avignone-Rossa,
A.E. Thumser, R.C.T. Slade, Activated carbon cloth as anode for sulfate
removal in a microbial fuel cell, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 4971e4976.
[220] L. Zhuang, Y. Zheng, S. Zhou, Y. Yuan, H. Yuan, Y. Chen, Scalable microbial fuel cell
(MFC) stack for continuous real wastewater treatment, Bioresour. Technol. 106
(2012) 82e88, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.11.019.
[221] L. Zhuang, S. Zhou, Y. Wang, C. Liu, S. Geng, Membrane-less cloth cathode
assembly (CCA) for scalable microbial fuel cells, Biosens. Bioelectron. 24
(2009) 3652e3656, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2009.05.032.
[222] Y. Zuo, S. Cheng, D. Call, B.E. Logan, Tubular membrane cathodes for scalable
power generation in microbial fuel cells, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (2007)
3347e3353.
[223] Y. Zuo, S. Cheng, B.E. Logan, Ion-exchange membrane cathodes for scalable
microbial fuel cells, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 6967e6972.