C H A P T E R

3
Electrocoagulation:
Fundamentals and Prospectives
Carlos E. Barrera-Dı́az*, Patricia
Balderas-Hernández*, Bryan Bilyeu†
*Joint Center for Research in Sustainable Chemistry, UAEM-UNAM,
Toluca, M
exico
†
Xavier University of Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, United States

O U T L I N E

Coagulation Versus Electrocoagulation 61

Electrocoagulation Fundamentals 63
The Faraday Law and Its Importance in Electrocoagulation 65
Superfaradic Efficiency 65
Predominant Chemical Species Distribution in Aqueous Solution
During Electrocoagulation Process 66
Coupled Electrocoagulation-Ozone 70
Future Perspectives 73
References 73

COAGULATION VERSUS ELECTROCOAGULATION

Chemical coagulation is an essential part of drinking water and waste-

water treatment. In drinking water, it is used for the clarification of water,
using coagulant agents mainly for municipal water treatment.

Electrochemical Water and Wastewater Treatment 61 © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813160-2.00003-1
62 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

Physical separation techniques for treating colloidal wastewater, such as

sedimentation, are not adequate since colloidal systems contain particles
from 0.1 μm to 1 nm. This makes the settling velocity range from 0.3 to
3 m per year, and implies that the process time will be extremely long.
In many cases, wastewater that contains colloids does not agglomerate
and is stable. The main reason is that the particles have an electric charge
which makes the ions that surround them create a double electric layer,
so colloidal particles will repel, preventing contact and not agglomerating.
Therefore, Fe or Al cations are introduced into the solution to neutralize the
charge and allow the particles to join, forming flocs that can sediment [1–3].
Traditional chemical coagulation uses aluminum and iron coagulants.
The most common aluminum coagulants are aluminum sulfate, aluminum
chloride, and sodium aluminate. Iron coagulants include ferric sulfate, fer-
rous sulfate, ferric chloride, and ferric chloride sulfate [4].
Coagulant effectiveness relies on its ability to form multicharged poly-
nuclear complexes with enhanced adsorption characteristics. The nature
of the complexes formed may be controlled by the pH of the system
(for a more detailed description, see the predominant chemical species
distribution in an aqueous solution during the electrocoagulation process
section). Coagulation effectiveness depends on the following process vari-
ables: mixing, pH, and coagulant dose, and it is common practice to use a
laboratory jar test to determine optimized values [5].
For practical wastewater applications, chemical treatment (Fig. 1) may
require up to three chemical reagents and pH adjustments for effective
treatment, resulting in an expensive and labor-intensive process. On the
other hand, electrocoagulation doesn’t require external chemicals and
removes any size of suspended solids, oil, and grease, as well as heavy
metals.

Coagulant Precipitate
forms and
precipitate, trapped
Coagulant trapping pollutant
added pollutants settle to
bottom

Sludge
Pollutant Flocs

FIG. 1 Illustration of the chemical coagulation process to remove colloidal pollutants.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 ELECTROCOAGULATION FUNDAMENTALS 63

One of the main drawbacks of using chemical coagulation is the large

amount of residual sludge formed at the end of the process. Electrocoagu-
lation produces about half the sludge of chemical coagulation. Rigorous
legislation is now in effect in several countries to limit the impact of such
residuals on the environment. Wastewater sludge is generally character-
ized by BOD concentrations in the hundreds and COD concentrations in
the thousands of mg L
1 [6].

ELECTROCOAGULATION FUNDAMENTALS

Electrocoagulation is an electrochemical water and wastewater treat-

ment which uses an electrochemical cell in which direct current voltage
is applied to sacrificial electrodes, commonly iron or aluminum.
Commonly, electrocoagulation takes place when electrochemical reac-
tions take place on the anode and cathode, but solution reactions also play
an important role in the process, as shown in reactions (1)–(3).
Anodic reaction
Al0 . Al3 + + 3e
(1)
Cathodic reaction
2H2 O + 2e
. 2OH
+ H2 0 (2)
Solution reaction
Al3 + + 3OH
.AlðOHÞ3 (3)
The following steps can be identified: (1) anode oxidation, in which the
metal cations (Al or Fe) are generated; (2) water is electrolyzed in the cath-
ode, producing small hydrogen bubbles and hydroxide; (3) solution reac-
tions, in which metal ions react with hydroxide to form hydroxy
complexes, which adsorb the pollutants, form coagulants, and can then
be separated by coagulation/flocculation processes [7,8].
Fig. 2 shows the electrochemical reactions that take place on the elec-
trodes (A) and the chemical reactions in the aqueous solution (B).
As seen in Fig. 2, the electrochemical dissolution of Al and the hydro-
gen production (bubble generation) takes place at the same time in
electrocoagulation.
Thus, the electrocoagulation reactor is primarily operating as an elec-
trochemical dosing reactor in which the Al or Fe addition is controlled
and the metal ions produce colloidal aggregation that results in increased
size and floc formation. In the case of the bubble generation, if the applied
current is low the number of bubbles is small, so this favors the sedimen-
tation of the flocs. With higher applied currents, the bubble generation

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

64 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

FIG. 2 (A) Electrolytic reactions and (B) solution reactions in the electrocoagulation
process.

increases. Thus, the combination of increased aggregation and bubble pro-

duction makes flotation the primary removal mechanism [9–11].
It has been reported that the pH also affects the bubble size. Typical
bubble sizes in electrocoagulation are in the range of 20–70 μm. The size
of the bubbles is smaller than those observed in conventional air-assisted
flotation, which provides both sufficient surface area for gas-liquid-solid

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 SUPERFARADIC EFFICIENCY 65

interfaces and mixing efficiency to favor the aggregation of tiny destabi-

lized particles. In particular, hydrogen bubbles usually obey a log normal
size distribution, known to be the smallest at neutral pH [12].

THE FARADAY LAW AND ITS IMPORTANCE IN

ELECTROCOAGULATION

Current density is a key factor in electrocoagulation, since it is the only

operational parameter that can be controlled directly. Indeed, current den-
sity controls the anodic and cathodic reactions and also the chemical rate.
The importance of the Faraday law in electrocoagulation is that it
describes the relationship of the current density and the amount of metal-
lic electrodes dissolved [13].
The Faraday law allows calculation of the mass of Fe or Al ions electro-
chemically produced, as indicated in Eq. (4), [14,15]:
it
n¼ (4)
zF
Where n is the number of moles of metal dissolved, i is the current in
amperes, t is the electrolysis time in seconds, F is the Faraday constant
(F ¼ 96,500 C mol
1), and z is the charge of the cation (z ¼ 3 + for Al or
2 + for Fe).

SUPERFARADIC EFFICIENCY

As previously described, the concentration of metal ions in a solution

using electrocoagulation can be determined by the Faraday law; thus, this
concentration should correspond to the maximum theoretical quantity of
electrochemical Al or Fe ions produced and the current efficiency should
be 100%. However, experimental data suggests that the ion concentration
can be higher than the one predicted by the Faraday law [16]. This phe-
nomenon has been called “superfaradiac efficiency.”
Superfaradaic efficiency implies that there can be more Fe and Al ions
in a solution than expected. This effect can be beneficial for the process
since less energy or process time is required to obtain a desired coagulant
dose. The question that arises is: where does the added concentration
come from? There are two answers, one electrochemical and one chemical.
The electrochemical answer can be found in a detailed revision of the
cathodic reaction. In principle, this reaction corresponds to the hydrogen
generation as shown in Fig. 2; but from the thermodynamics point of view,
it is possible that an electrochemical process takes place at the cathode pro-
moting Al or Fe dissolution. Therefore, two simultaneous reactions are

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

66 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

taking place in the cathode: hydrogen evolution and at some extent Al of

Fe dissolution.
Another effect is that electrochemical oxidation and reduction of water
can modify the pH on the anode and cathode surfaces with respect to the
bulk pH. Thus, a chemical reaction contributes to the chemical dissolution
of the electrode [17–19].

PREDOMINANT CHEMICAL SPECIES DISTRIBUTION

IN AQUEOUS SOLUTION DURING
ELECTROCOAGULATION PROCESS

As previously stated, many pollutants contained in wastewater are in

colloidal form. Colloids normally have a negative charge around them,
and when metal cations are released into a solution this charge is neutral-
ized (measured as Zeta potential). Thus, the colloids stop the repulsion
and start to form flocs, causing sedimentation and separation from the
water. Traditionally, the electrodes used in electrocoagulation are Fe
and Al. However, recent research indicate that Cu and Zn can be used.
In Figs. 3 and 4, the predominant chemical species of these metals are
shown. It can be observed that there are different chemical species as a
function of pH. In particular, these diagrams indicate the existence and
abundance of some chemical species according to the conditions in an
aqueous solution. For instance, in Fig. 3A Fe2+ is the predominant chem-
ical specie up to a pH of 8, and then Fe(OH)2(s) starts to prevail. The same
behavior is observed with Al, Cu, and Zn. In acidic conditions the cation is
ready available for a reaction, and when the pH is raised hydroxocom-
plexes start to appear. This implies that solutions reactions will have dif-
ferent reaction rates and the process efficacy will be reduced.
Note that in all cases at low pH values, the simple cation form of the
metal is present. However, once the pH is increased the hydro-complexes
of the cations start to appear. In the case of iron, Fe(II) has a larger pH win-
dow in which it can be a free cation; on the other hand, Fe(III) on has a
small range of pH values in which it can be present as the cation. This
implies that redox reactions in an aqueous solution could affect the effec-
tiveness of the pollutant removal process. Aluminum presents three clear
zones; the first one is related with the free ion, and the other two are
related with hydro-complexes. Cu and Zn species diagrams are quite sim-
ilar, presenting two zones for the free and complex forms according to the
pH values.
Recent reports of using Al, Cu, Fe, and Zn anodes are provided in
Table 1. Note that in some cases the use of Al or Fe provide better pollutant
removal results; i.e., for pulp and paper wastewater Al works better; on
the other hand, for carwash wastewater Fe provides superior results. Note

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 CHEMICAL SPECIES DISTRIBUTION IN AQUEOUS SOLUTION DURING 67
ELECTROCOAGULATION PROCESS

0.8

0.6
Fraction

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
(A) pH

0.8
Fraction

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
(B) pH
FIG. 3 Chemical species distribution diagrams of (A) Fe(II) [, Fe2+; ☐, Fe(OH)2(s)] and
(B) Fe(III) [, Fe3+; ☐, Fe2O3(cr); △, Fe(OH)2+] species in an aqueous solution.

that although traditional Al and Fe electrodes have been extensively used,

other metals can be used as sacrificial anodes. In the case of Cu and Zn,
high pollutant removal efficiencies can be achieved for different types
of wastewater. Furthermore, some alloys such as Al-Zn-In and
Mg-Al-Zn present high removal rates, indicating that not only pure
anodes can be used in electrocoagulation.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

68 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

0.8

0.6
Fraction
0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
pH
(A)
1

0.8
Fraction

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
pH
(B)
1

0.8
Fraction

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
pH
(C)
FIG. 4 Chemical species diagram of (A) Al [, Al3+; ☐, Al(OH)3(cr); △, AlðOHÞ4
; ◇,
Al(OH)2+], (B) Cu(II) [, Cu2+; ☐, CuðOHÞ4 2
; △, CuO(cr)] and (C) Zn(II) [, Zn2+; ☐,


4 ; ◇, ZnðOHÞ3 ] species in an aqueous solution.
ZnO(cr); △, Zn(OH)2

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 CHEMICAL SPECIES DISTRIBUTION IN AQUEOUS SOLUTION DURING 69
ELECTROCOAGULATION PROCESS

TABLE 1 Electrocoagulation Using Al, Cu, Fe, and Zn as Anodes

Wastewater Process conditions Results Ref

Pulp and paper mill Fe and Al anodes, current Al electrode system showed [20]
wastewater treatment density of 20 Am
2 an increase by 31% in COD
removal and a decrease by
48% in energy consumption
compared with Fe electrode
system

Removal of the Current density of 76% and 97% of [21]

Reactive Black 5 (RB5) 16 A m
2, initial pH of 6, decolorization after 45 and
dye from aqueous 100 mg L
1 of RB5, and Al 120 min of operation
solutions anodes

Electrochemical Al and Fe electrodes, pH: 8, Fe electrode presents higher [22]

treatment of carwash current density: 3 A m
2, COD and oil-grease
wastewater using Fe operating time: 30 removals from carwash
and Al electrode wastewaters

Removal of Al electrodes pH 7.78, Removal efficiency of 89% [23]

ciprofloxacin from interelectrode distance
hospital wastewater 1 cm, reaction time 20 min,
current density
12.5 mA cm
2, and
electrolyte dose of 0.07 M
NaCl

Treatment of Al electrode optimum pH of 84% of COD reduction and [24]

wastewater from 7.5, electrode distance of 88% of color removal
sugarcane process 20 mm, current density of
industry 178 A m
2, and electrolyte
concentration of 0.5 M

Soft drink wastewater Boron-doped diamond-Cu Removal efficiencies were [25]

treatment electrodes and a current COD 75% and TOC 85%
density of 30 A m
2

Treatment of a Zn anode pH ¼ 3.0, current Removal of 86% of the total [26]

synthetic phenolic intensity ¼ 0.4 A, [NaCl] ¼ phenolic content and 49% of
mixture 1.5 g L
1, intergap chemical oxygen demand
distance ¼ 1.0 cm

Removal of chromium Al-Zn-In-alloy anode at a Removal efficiency of 98.2% [27]

from drinking water current density of
0.2 A dm
2, at a pH of 7.0

Removal of fluoride Mg-Al-Zn alloy as an anode Removal efficiency of 96% [28]

from drinking water and stainless steel as
cathode at a current
density of 0.2 A dm
2 and a
pH of 7.0
Continued

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

70 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

TABLE 1 Electrocoagulation Using Al, Cu, Fe, and Zn as Anodes—cont’d

Wastewater Process conditions Results Ref

Arsenic removal from Zn, Cu-Zn, and Fe anodes, Removal efficient, with the [29]
underground water with a current density of followed tendency using
1.5 mA cm
2 anodes of Fe (>93%) Zn
(>93%) > Cu-Zn (>73%)

Reduction of pollutants Copper electrocoagulation Reduction of BOD5 by 81%, [30]

and disinfection of and hydrogen peroxide and color by 97%; under the
industrial wastewater same conditions, the total
coliforms, fecal coliforms,
and bacteria are all reduced
by 99%

Removal of organic Cu anodes for Integrated electrochemical [31]

pollutants in industrial electrocoagulation and process reduces the COD by
wastewater BDD anodes for H2O2 78% and fecal coliforms by
production, optimal 99.9%
conditions of pH 2.8, and
14.2 mA cm
2 of current
density

Removal of Perfluoro- Zn anodes for Reduction of 90% of [32]

alkyl Acids electrocoagulation perfluoroalkyl acids

Removal of boron from Zn anodes using a current Reduction of 93% of boron [33]
water density of 0.2 A dm
2, at
pH of 7.0

COUPLED ELECTROCOAGULATION-OZONE

The use of combined processes results in higher pollutant removal,

reduced process time, and decreased sludge generation. In this sense,
these processes tend to be more efficient and sustainable. Previous
research dealing with ozone-coupled methods indicates that the ozona-
tion of anaerobically pretreated waste significantly enhances the organic
removal in comparison to the ozonation of unpretreated waste, and sub-
strate conversions in the range of 40%–67% can be reached. In the case of
electrocoagulation-ozone coupled process, the ozone is applied at the
same time as electrocoagulation takes place, as shown in Fig. 5.
Ozone is introduced in the bottom of the reactor through a performed
plate which promotes small bubbles. The process requires the ozone mol-
ecules to transfer from the gas phase to the aqueous phase, where the
attack on the organic molecules occurs. Ozone is a well-known strong oxi-
dant that interacts with organic pollutants in two ways: direct oxidation of
the organic matter and an indirect process that relies on the generation of
free-radical intermediates such as the •OH radical, which is a powerful,
effective, and nonselective oxidizing agent.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 COUPLED ELECTROCOAGULATION-OZONE 71

FIG. 5 Ozone addition in an electrocoagulation reactor.

In the coupled ozone-electrocoagulation treatment, the following

simultaneous process takes place:

(a) Ozone oxidizes the organic molecules that are dissolved in the solution
and that cannot be eliminated via electrocoagulation.
(b) The dissolved iron ions provided by the electrochemical reaction
promote hydroxide radical production because Fe2+ ions catalyze
ozone decomposition to generate hydroxyl radicals as a Fenton-like
process.
(c) The electrochemical reactions at the anode and cathode induce the
aqueous solution reactions that promote the coagulation/flocculation
process.
(d) Supplying ozone bubbles into the reactor promotes the mixing
between the reactants, so the mass transfer is enhanced.
(e) The ozone action contributes to the reduction in the amount of sludge
produced.

This process helps to explain the synergistic effect of the combination of

both technologies and the resulting high efficiencies.
The main reactions in the combined process are the following:
Fe2 + + O3 ! ðFeOÞ2 + + O2 (5)

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

72 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

FeO2 + + H2 O ! Fe3 + + HO  + OH
(6)

FeO2 + + Fe2 + + 2H + ! 2Fe3 + + H2 O (7)

Table 2 shows some recent examples of wastewater treatment using a
combined electrocoagulation-ozone process.
As shown in Table 2, the use of ozone during the electrocoagulation
process can be applied to a wide variety of wastewaters, which indicates
that this process offers the key advantage of versatility. In all cases, the use
of only ozone is limited by the mass transfer of the gas/liquid phase. How-
ever, the presence of electrochemically produced cations such as Fe or Al
induces two simultaneous reactions: Fenton-like reactions that increase
the oxidation of organic pollutants and floc formation for the sedimenta-
tion of colloids. An additional advantage of this process is that the sludge
formation is less than electrocoagulation alone.

TABLE 2 Recent Wastewater Treatment Using a Coupled Electrocoagulation-Ozone

Treatment
Wastewater Process conditions Results Ref
Distillery effluent 3 A dm
2, initial COD Process reduced total [34]
3000 ppm, initial pH 7, chemical oxygen demand
process time 5 h, ozone by 95%
flow rate 15 L min
1

Gray wastewater Aluminum and graphite Process reduced total [35]

electrodes 0.9 A dm
2, chemical oxygen demand
during 90 min pH 8, and at by 91% and total organic
9.2 g h
1 of ozone dosage carbon by 85%

Removal of Iron and aluminum Complete removal of [36]

arsenic, electrode plates with arsenic, phosphates, color,
phosphates, and simultaneous ozonation turbidity, suspended
ammonia from solids, and ammonia
well water

Wastewater that Al electrocoagulation and Color removal of 99.9% [37]

contains offset ozonation color and 99.4% COD
printing dye

Dairy industry Rectangular Al anodes and 80% COD removal [38]

wastewater Fe cathodes were used in
parallel using 5 mA cm
2
and ozone

Wastewater Fe electrocoagulation and Removal rates reached [39]

containing ozone dosage 4.2 mg L
1 COD 82.2% and 94.4%
hydrolyzed poly- HPAM
acryamide

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 REFERENCES 73

TABLE 2 Recent Wastewater Treatment Using a Coupled Electrocoagulation-Ozone

Treatment—cont’d
Wastewater Process conditions Results Ref
Winery Electrocoagulation using Removal of COD and [40]
wastewater stainless steel, iron, and sulfates was 77% and 62%,
aluminum electrode with respectively
ozonation

Electro-plating Electrocoagulation with Removal efficiencies of [41]

wastewater aluminum electrodes and Cr(VI), Fe, Ni, Cu, Zn, Pb,
ozonation TOC, and COD were 99.9%,
100%, 95.8%, 98.6%, 99.9%,
96.8%, 93.2%, and 93.4%,
respectively

Preparation of Electrocoagulation using Removal efficiencies for [42]

drinking water iron and aluminum color, turbidity, suspended
used in water electrode plates with solids, total arsenic, total
supply systems ozonation chromium, Ni(II), total
copper, sulfates, fluorides,
chemical oxygen demand,
ammonia, nitrates, and
nitrites were 100%
Dye removal in 65% color removal, 76% [43]
denim effluents turbidity removal, and 37%
COD reduction

FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

Electrocoagulation wastewater treatment has received special attention as

a high-performance and reliable process, due to its easy operation and low
maintenance, along with its ability to be adapted to current systems in many
industrial applications. One limitation of this process is anodic/cathodic sur-
face passivation that takes place over time, reducing the efficiency of the pro-
cess. Another limitation of the process is that it is only effective on colloidal
and suspended contaminants. Thus, for dissolved substances other methods
would need to be coupled with electrocoagulation.

References
[1] P. Cañizares, M. Carmona, J. Lobato, F. Martinez, M.A. Rodrigo, Electrodissolution of
aluminum electrodes in electrocoagulation processes, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44 (2005)
4178–4185.
[2] C.E. Barrera, M.E. Palomar, M. Romero, S. Martı́nez, Chemical and electrochemical
considerations on the removal process of hexavalent chromium from aqueous media,
J. Appl. Electrochem. 33 (2003) 61–71.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

74 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

[3] H.S. Peavy, D.R. Rowe, G. Tchobanoglous, Environmental Engineering, McGraw-Hill,

New York, 1985, p. 56.
[4] J. Bratby, Coagulation and Flocculation in Water and Wastewater Treatment, IWA Pub-
lishing, London, Seattle, 2006. 75 pp.
[5] M. Fanun, The Role of Colloidal Systems in Environmental Protection, first ed., Elsevier,
UK, 2014, 692.
[6] W. David, Hendricks Fundamentals of Water Treatment Unit Processes: Physical,
Chemical, and Biological, IWA Publishing, Netherlands, 2010. 110 pp.
[7] A.S. Koparal, U.B. Ogutveren, Removal of nitrate from water by electroreduction and
electrocoagulation, J. Hazard. Mater. 89 (2002) 83–94.
[8] P.R. Kumar, S.C. Chaudhari, K.C. Khilar, S.P. Majahan, Removal of arsenic from waste-
water by electrocoagulation, Chemosphere 55 (2004) 1245–1252.
[9] P.K. Holt, G.W. Barton, C.A. Mitchell, Deciphering the science behind electrocoagula-
tion to remove suspended clay particles from water, Water Sci. Technol. 50 (2004)
177–184.
[10] C.Y. Hu, S.L. Lo, W.H. Kuan, Y.D. Lee, Removal of fluoride from semiconductor waste-
water by electrocoagulation-flotation, Water Res. 39 (2005) 895–901.
[11] C.T. Souris, D.W. DePaoil, J.T. Shor, M.Z.C. Hu, T.Y. Ying, Electrocoagulation of mag-
netic seeding of colloidal particles, Coll. Surf. A: Phys. Chem. Asp. 177 (2001) 223–233.
[12] N. Adhoum, L. Monser, N. Bellakhal, J. Belgaied, Treatment of electroplating wastewa-
ter containing Cu2+, Zn2 + and Cr(VI) by electrocoagulation, J. Hazard. Mater.
112 (2004) 207–213.
[13] C. Comninellis, G. Chen, Electrochemistry for the Environment, Springer, New York,
2009. 566 pp.
[14] D. Wang, H. Tang, J. Gregory, Relative importance of charge neutralization and precip-
itation on coagulation of kaolin with PACl: effect of sulfate ion, Environ. Sci. Technol.
36 (2002) 1815–1820.
[15] M.I. Aguilar, J. Sáez, M. Llor
eis, A. Soler, J.F. Ortuño, V. Meseguer, A. Fuentes, Improve-
ment of coagulation-flocculation process using anionic polyacrylamide as coagulant aid,
Chemosphere 58 (2005) 47–56.
[16] T. Picard, G. Cathalifaud-Feuillade, M. Mazet, C. Vandensteendam, Cathodic dissolu-
tion in the electrocoagulation process using aluminium electrodes, J. Environ. Monit.
2 (2000) 77–80.
[17] P. Cañizares, F. Martı́nez, M. Carmona, J. Lobato, M.A. Rodrigo, Continuous electrocoa-
gulation of synthetic colloid-polluted wastes, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44 (2005) 8171–8177.
[18] C.E. Barrera, N.F. Ureña, E. Campos, M. Palomar, M. Romero, A combined
electrochemical-irradiation treatment of highly colored and polluted industrial waste-
water, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 67 (2003) 657–663.
[19] C.E. Barrera, G. Roa, L. Ávila, T. Pavón, B. Bilyeu, Electrochemical treatment applied to
food-processing industrial wastewater, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45 (2006) 34–38.
[20] S. Camcioglu, B. Ozyurt, H. Hapoglu, Effect of process control on optimization of pulp
and paper mill wastewater treatment by electrocoagulation, Process. Saf. Environ. Prot.
111 (2017) 300–319.
[21] A.S. Fajardo, R.C. Martins, D.R. Silva, C.A. Martı́nez-Huitle, R.M. Quinta-Ferreira, Dye
wastewaters treatment using batch and recirculation flow electrocoagulation systems,
J. Electroanal. Chem. 801 (2017) 30–37.
[22] Z.B. G€ onder, G. Balcıoğlu, I. Vergili, Y. Kaya, Electrochemical treatment of carwash
wastewater using Fe and Al electrode: techno-economic analysis and sludge character-
ization, J. Environ. Manag. 200 (2017) 380–390.
[23] S. Ahmadzadeh, A. Asadipour, M. Pournamdari, B. Behnam, H.R. Rahimi,
M. Dolatabadi, Removal of ciprofloxacin from hospital wastewater using electrocoagu-
lation technique by aluminum electrode: optimization and modelling through response
surface methodology, Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 109 (2017) 538–547.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

 REFERENCES 75
[24] O. Sahu, D.G. Rao, R. Gopal, A. Tiwari, D. Pal, Treatment of wastewater from sugarcane
process industry by electrochemical and chemical process: aluminum (metal and salt),
J. Water Process. Eng. 17 (2017) 50–62.
[25] I. Linares, C.E. Barrera, M. Vald
es, P.T. Almazán, M. Castañeda, V. Lugo, Soft drink
wastewater treatment by electrocoagulation—electrooxidation processes, Environ.
Technol. 38 (2017) 433–442.
[26] A.S. Fajardo, R.C. Martins, R.M. Quinta-Ferreira, Treatment of a synthetic phenolic mix-
ture by electrocoagulation using Al, Cu, Fe, Pb, and Zn as anode materials, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 53 (2014) 18339–18345.
[27] S. Vasudevan, J. Lakshmi, G. Sozhan, Studies on the Al-Zn-In-alloy as anode material for
the removal of chromium from drinking water in electrocoagulation process,
Desalination 275 (2011) 260–268.
[28] S. Vasudevan, J. Lakshmi, G. Sozhan, Studies on a Mg-Al-Zn alloy as an anode for the
removal of fluoride from drinking water in an electrocoagulation process, Clean - Soil,
Air, Water 37 (2009) 372–378.
[29] C. Montero-Ocampo, A. Maldonado, O. Solorza-Feria, in: Arsenic removal from under-
ground water by electrocoagulation with zinc, brass and iron (conference paper), 209th
ECS meeting; Denver, CO; United States. ECS Transactions 2: 71–85, 2006.
[30] C.E. Barrera-Dı́az, B.A. Frontana-Uribe, G. Roa-Morales, B.W. Bilyeu, Reduction of pol-
lutants and disinfection of industrial wastewater by an integrated system of copper elec-
trocoagulation and electrochemically generated hydrogen peroxide, J. Environ. Sci.
Health - Part A Tox. Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 50 (2015) 406–413.
[31] C.E. Barrera-Dı́az, B. Frontana-Uribe, B.W. Bilyeu, Removal of organic pollutants in
industrial wastewater with an integrated system of copper electrocoagulation and
electrogenerated H2O2, Chemosphere 105 (2014) 160–164.
[32] H. Lin, Y. Wang, J. Niu, Z. Yue, Q. Huang, Efficient sorption and removal of Perfluor-
oalkyl acids (PFAAs) from aqueous solution by metal hydroxides generated in situ by
electrocoagulation, Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 (2015) 10562–10569.
[33] S. Vasudevan, J. Lakshmi, G. Sozhan, Electrochemically assisted coagulation for the
removal of boron from water using zinc anode, Desalination 310 (2013) 122–129.
[34] P. Asaithambi, A.R.A. Aziz, W.M.A.B.W. Daud, Integrated ozone—Electrocoagulation
process for the removal of pollutant from industrial effluent: optimization
through response surface methodology, Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif.
105 (2016) 92–102.
[35] R. Daghrir, A. Gherrou, I. Noel, B. Seyhi, Hybrid process combining electrocoagulation,
electroreduction, and ozonation processes for the treatment of grey wastewater in batch
mode, J. Environ. Eng. 142 (2016) 1123–1240.
[36] V. Orescanin, R. Kollar, K. Nad, I. Halkijevic, M. Kuspilic, S. Findri, Removal of arsenic,
phosphates and ammonia from well water using electrochemical/chemical methods
and advanced oxidation: a pilot plant approach, J. Environ. Sci. Health - Part A Tox. Haz-
ard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 49 (2014) 1007–1014.
[37] G. Roa-Morales, C. Barrera-Dı́az, P. Balderas-Hernández, F.Z. Aldumbide-Ortiz,
H. Reyes Perez, B. Bilyeu, removal of color and chemical oxygen demand using a
coupled coagulation-electrocoagulation-ozone treatment of industrial wastewater that
contains offset printing dyes, J. Mex. Chem. Soc. 58 (2014) 362–368.
[38] A.L. Torres-Sánchez, S.J. López-Cervera, C. de la Rosa, M. Maldonado-Vega,
M. Maldonado-Santoyo, J.M. Peralta-Hernández, Electrocoagulation process coupled
with advance oxidation techniques to treatment of dairy industry wastewater, Int.
J. Electrochem. Sci. 9 (2014) 6103–6112.
[39] B. Wang, J. Li, H. Ren, J. Li, C. Yue, Degradation process of hydrolyzed polyacryamide in
polymer flooding produced wastewater by ozonation, Shinyou Huagong/Petr. Technol.
43 (2014) 832–837.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS

76 3. ELECTROCOAGULATION: FUNDAMENTALS AND PROSPECTIVES

[40] V. Orescanin, R. Kollar, I.L. Mikelic, K. Nad, Electroplating wastewater treatment by the
combined electrochemical and ozonation methods, J. Environ. Sci. Health - Part A. Tox.
Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 48 (2013) 1450–1455.
[41] V. Orescanin, R. Kollar, K. Nad, I.L. Mikelic, S.F. Gustek, Treatment of winery wastewa-
ter by electrochemical methods and advanced oxidation processes, J. Environ. Sci.
Health - Part A Tox. Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 48 (2013) 1543–1547.
[42] V. Orescanin, R. Kollar, K. Nad, N. Mikulic, Preparation of drinking water used in water
supply systems of the towns Zrenjanin and Temerin by electrochemical methods,
J. Environ. Sci.Health - Part A Tox. Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 48 (2013) 437–445.
[43] M.A. Garcı́a-Morales, G. Roa-Morales, C. Barrera-Dı́az, V.M. Miranda, P.B. Hernández,
T.B. Silva, Integrated advanced oxidation process (ozonation) and electrocoagulation
treatments for dye removal in denim effluents, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 8 (2013)
8752–8763.

I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FUNDAMENTALS