ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2024
Critical evaluation of electroactive wetlands: traditional and modern advances.
Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Hydraulic Retention Time on Removal of Cr (VI) and p-Chlorophenol and Electricity Generation inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the field of sustainable wastewater management, electroactive wetlands (EW), or constructed wetland-microbial fuel cells (CW-MFC), are an emerging technology. With the growing problem of untreated wastewater, the emphasis must shift to decentralisation of wastewater treatment infrastructure, and CW-MFC can be an excellent choice. This review provides a chronologically organized account of the design and configuration of CW-MFCs developed between 2010 and 2023. The research on CW-MFC has mainly focused on material, positioning and number of electrodes; use of electroconductive media and filler materials; flow regime; algal-based CW-MFC and multistage setups. Compared to traditional constructed wetlands (CW) and microbial fuel cells (MFC), CW-MFCs have a number of advantages, including better treatment efficiency, faster organic matter utilisation, lower capital and land requirements and a smaller carbon footprint. However, there are some limitations as well, such as upscaling and viable electricity generation, which are covered in more detail in the article. Moreover, the economics of this technology is also evaluated. The microbiology of a CW-MFC and its influence on its performance are also elaborated. Recent advancements in this field in terms of design, configuration and performance are discussed. Finally, the knowledge gaps that must be addressed before this technique can be successfully implemented on a large scale are highlighted, along with specific recommendations. This article aims to advocate for EWs as an ideal decentralised wastewater treatment technique, while also shedding light on the areas that still need to be worked on.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38289554What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.