Coupled Microbial Electrolysis Cells and Struvite Precipitation for Enhanced Nutrient Recovery from Wastewater
Authors: Skinn Brian , Southworth Laura , Patel Sohum , Snyder Stephen , Cusick Roland D , Inman Maria , Taylor E. J. 
Published: February 2020

Anaerobic digestion is extensively used to recover energy from municipal waste and animal manure. The liquid effluent of anaerobic digestion typically contains high concentrations of ammonium, phosphorus, and divalent cations, which can potentially be recovered by precipitation of sparingly soluble phosphate salts [1-5]. The majority of processes focus on struvite (magnesium ammonium phosphate) crystallization, as both nitrogen and phosphorus are removed and struvite is salable as slow-release plant fertilizer. The potential economics of recovering renewable sources of nitrogen and phosphorus have led to development of various phosphate salt crystallization systems [5-7]. Fluidized bed reactors (FBRs) are commonly used for crystallized phosphate recovery because the design creates an abundance of reactive surface area and solution turbulence [8], enhancing nucleation kinetics and agglomeration. Despite generally high nutrient recovery efficiencies in FBRs, the economic favorability of phosphate salt crystallization systems could be significantly enhanced by increasing the operating pH within the FBR to near the minimum solubility point of struvite (pH = 9 [3]) Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) is often used in research-scale investigation of these technologies because it is highly soluble and can rapidly increase the solution pH [4,7,9,10]. However, such chemical addition approaches can drive up phosphorus recovery costs (as high as $3,500/ton-P) significantly beyond the value of nutrients contained in struvite (~$765/ton-P) [3,11].

Recently, microbial electrochemical technologies (METs), such as microbial fuel cells (MFCs) and microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) have garnered interest as a chemical-free and energy efficient method of enhancing struvite precipitation [12-14]. METs consist of an anode, where anaerobic microbes oxidize organic matter and transfer electrons to an external circuit, and a cathode where the electrons and protons catalytically combine by reducing oxygen to water (MFC) or producing hydrogen gas (MEC). This talk will discuss preliminary results from a bench-scale MEC-FBR system (Figure 1) that demonstrate the potential for an MEC to enable economical pH control in an FBR struvite precipitation system. Net alkali generation rates of approximately 2.3 ± 1.5 mmol m-
2 h-1 were observed in both DC and pulsed-potential MEC tests, which are of reasonable magnitude for typical applications. When only the electrical power input is considered, these experimental data translate to a per-mole cost of alkali generated by an MEC (~7¢ mol-1) that is an order of magnitude lower than the cost of purchased NaOH (~87¢ mol-1). A preliminary net present value (NPV) analysis of the entire MEC unit operation, including both capital and operating costs, suggests a reasonable rate of return can likely be achieved. As well, the data provide preliminary indication of the possibility of further cost advantages from the use of pulsed MEC potentials.

The authors acknowledge financial support from USEPA Contract No. EP-D-17-006.

References

[1] Battistoni, P., A. De Angelis, P. Pavan, M. Prisciandaro, F. Cecchi. “Phosphorus removal from a real anaerobic supernatant by struvite crystallization.” Water Research
35(9): 2167 (2001).

[2] Snoeyink, V., D. Jenkins. Water Chemistry.John Wiley (1980).

[3] Doyle, J., S. Parsons. “Struvite formation, control and recovery.” Water Research
36(16): 3925 (2002).

[4] Ohlinger, K., T. Young, E. Schroeder. “Kinetics effects on preferential struvite accumulation in wastewater.” Journal of Environmental Engineering
126: 730 (1999).

[5] Ohlinger, K., T. Young, E. Schroeder. “Postdigestion struvite precipitation using a fluidized bed reactor.” Journal of Environmental Engineering
126: 361 (2000).

[6] Ohlinger, K., T. Young, E. Schroeder. “Predicting struvite formation in digestion.” Water Research
32(12): 3607 (1998).

[7] Bhuiyan, M., D. Mavinic, F. Koch. “Phosphorus recovery from wastewater through struvite formation in fluidized bed reactors: a sustainable approach.” Water Science & Technology
57(2): 175 (2008).

[8] Seckler, M., O. Bruinsma, G. Van Rosmalen. “Phosphate removal in a fluidized bed--I. Identification of physical processes.” Water Research
30(7): 1585 (1996).

[9] Le Corre, K., E. Valsami-Jones, P. Hobbs, S. Parsons. “Impact of calcium on struvite crystal size, shape and purity.” Journal of Crystal Growth
283(3-4): 514 (2005).

[10] Le Corre, K., E. Valsami-Jones, P. Hobbs, B. Jefferson, S. Parsons. “Struvite crystallisation and recovery using a stainless steel structure as a seed material.” Water Research
41(11): 2449 (2007).

[11] Dockhorn, T. In “About the economy of phosphorus recovery,” pp. 145-158. IWA (2009).

[12] Cusick, R., B. Logan. “Phosphate recovery as struvite within a single chamber microbial electrolysis cell.” Bioresource Technology,
107: 110 (2012).

[13] Hirooka, K., O. Ichihashi. “Phosphorus recovery from artificial wastewater by microbial fuel cell and its effect on power generation.” Bioresource Technology
137: 368 (2013).

[14] Ichihashi, O., K. Hirooka. “Removal and recovery of phosphorus as struvite from swine wastewater using microbial fuel cell.” Bioresource Technology
114: 303 (2012).

Figure 1