Review

A mini-review on wastewater treatment through bioremediation towards enhanced field applications of the technology

  • This study reviewed the use of microorganisms for bioremediation of wastewater. The aim was to ensure enhanced transfer of findings on bioremediation experiments at laboratory level for field applications, which is currently limited. Using empirical studies and specified microbes, bioremediation was shown to clear or reduce concentrations of many pollutants found in both industrial and municipal effluents with high efficacy. Findings established that bioremediation efficacy differs based on the microbes used, the characteristics of the targeted wastewater for cleansing and the physicochemical and biological characteristics of the polluted environs. It was also established that bioremediation is sometimes limited in refractory contaminant remediation due to microbe incompatibility with pollutant resulting to enzyme inhibition, generation of toxic substances and slow microbial metabolism capacity, which could prolong bioremediation processes and reduce the resultant decontamination efficacy. To overcome these challenges, this review recommended the uptake of advancements such as bio-stimulation and bioaugmentation for bettered biodegradation of contaminants. Additionally, the use of genetically engineered approaches to improve the innate characteristics of bioremediators towards recalcitrant pollutants was found to improve effectiveness. The review also suggested the use of consortiums and multiple bioremediation approaches to improve bioremediation outcomes in future. Bioremediation therefore, has high potential in cleansing wastewater pollutants and biotechnological advances could further improve its field application outcomes.

    Citation: Joan Nyika, Megersa Olumana Dinka. A mini-review on wastewater treatment through bioremediation towards enhanced field applications of the technology[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2022, 9(4): 403-431. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2022025

    Related Papers:

    [1] Fahmi Astuti, Rima Feisy Azmi, Mohammad Arrafi Azhar, Fani Rahayu Hidayah Rayanisaputri, Muhammad Redo Ramadhan, Malik Anjelh Baqiya, Darminto . Employing Na2CO3 and NaCl as sources of sodium in NaFePO4 cathode: A comparative study on structure and electrochemical properties. AIMS Materials Science, 2024, 11(1): 102-113. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2024006
    [2] Christian M Julien, Alain Mauger, Ashraf E Abdel-Ghany, Ahmed M Hashem, Karim Zaghib . Smart materials for energy storage in Li-ion batteries. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(1): 137-148. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.1.137
    [3] Alain Mauger, Haiming Xie, Christian M. Julien . Composite anodes for lithium-ion batteries: status and trends. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(3): 1054-1106. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.3.1054
    [4] Christian M. Julien, Alain Mauger . Functional behavior of AlF3 coatings for high-performance cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries. AIMS Materials Science, 2019, 6(3): 406-440. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2019.3.406
    [5] Tomoya Kawabata, Shuji Aihara, Yukito Hagihara . Coalescence judgment criteria for the interaction between two close surface cracks by WES2805 and its safety margin for brittle fracture assessment. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(4): 1665-1682. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.4.1665
    [6] Mordechai Perl, Tomer Saley . The cumulative detrimental impact of pressure and autofrettage on the fatigue life of an externally cracked modern tank gun barrel. AIMS Materials Science, 2019, 6(5): 833-851. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2019.5.833
    [7] Hiroki Nara, Keisuke Morita, Tokihiko Yokoshima, Daikichi Mukoyama, Toshiyuki Momma, Tetsuya Osaka . Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy analysis with a symmetric cell for LiCoO2 cathode degradation correlated with Co dissolution. AIMS Materials Science, 2016, 3(2): 448-459. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.2.448
    [8] Ojo Sunday Isaac Fayomi, Adedamola Sode, Itopa Godwin Akande, Abimbola Patricia Idowu Popoola, Oluranti Agboola . Improving the structural properties and corrosion behaviour of electroless deposited Ni-P-Zn coatings on mild steel for advanced processes. AIMS Materials Science, 2020, 7(4): 441-452. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2020.4.441
    [9] Christian M. Julien, Alain Mauger . In situ Raman analyses of electrode materials for Li-ion batteries. AIMS Materials Science, 2018, 5(4): 650-698. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2018.4.650
    [10] Elisa Padovano, Francesco Trevisan, Sara Biamino, Claudio Badini . Processing of hybrid laminates integrating ZrB2/SiC and SiC layers. AIMS Materials Science, 2020, 7(5): 552-564. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2020.5.552
  • This study reviewed the use of microorganisms for bioremediation of wastewater. The aim was to ensure enhanced transfer of findings on bioremediation experiments at laboratory level for field applications, which is currently limited. Using empirical studies and specified microbes, bioremediation was shown to clear or reduce concentrations of many pollutants found in both industrial and municipal effluents with high efficacy. Findings established that bioremediation efficacy differs based on the microbes used, the characteristics of the targeted wastewater for cleansing and the physicochemical and biological characteristics of the polluted environs. It was also established that bioremediation is sometimes limited in refractory contaminant remediation due to microbe incompatibility with pollutant resulting to enzyme inhibition, generation of toxic substances and slow microbial metabolism capacity, which could prolong bioremediation processes and reduce the resultant decontamination efficacy. To overcome these challenges, this review recommended the uptake of advancements such as bio-stimulation and bioaugmentation for bettered biodegradation of contaminants. Additionally, the use of genetically engineered approaches to improve the innate characteristics of bioremediators towards recalcitrant pollutants was found to improve effectiveness. The review also suggested the use of consortiums and multiple bioremediation approaches to improve bioremediation outcomes in future. Bioremediation therefore, has high potential in cleansing wastewater pollutants and biotechnological advances could further improve its field application outcomes.



    1. Introduction

    Batteries have long been a very important commodity for satisfying the world’s mobile energy storage needs. But more than ever before, advanced lithium-ion batteries are receiving an increased level of interest due to expanded power capabilities and the near limitless assortment of application opportunities, from vehicles and laptop computers to orbiting satellites and electric tools. As transportation markets are coming into play, the environmental impact of lithium-ion batteries and durability characteristics against climate variation are becoming very important in both the component material selection and design [1,2,3,4,5]. In 1997, the concept of LiFePO4 as a possible cathode for today’s Li-ion batteries came to life [6]. This material, which has an olivine structure, has been a focal point for much experimentation and discussion, as it boasts several attractive qualities including a relatively high theoretical capacity of 170 mAh/g, great structural stability, long cycle life, environmentally benign qualities, and most importantly, safety due to great thermal stability [6,7]. However, LiFePO4 has a very low electronic conductivity, a property essential for battery design, but it has been greatly improved through the successful application of conductive coatings or cation doping, making it comparable with other cathode materials [8,9,10,11]. In addition to these attributes, the constituent materials are abundant and widely available at a relatively low cost [12], making LiFePO4 extremely attractive for high-power vehicles, military and space flight operations [13,14], and everyday consumer electronics.

    Phase transformation from lithium-poor (FePO4) to lithium-rich (LiFePO4) during intercalation induces different strains in each lattice direction: a, b, and c [15,16,17,18,19]. Stresses induced by the phase transformation create flaws or cracks that may become stress concentration areas when further cycling occurs [20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. As a result, cracks are often observed along the phase boundary on the ac-plane [15,27]; structural failure due to fracturing of active material is a primary factor in battery degradation [7,22,27,28,29,30]. A combination of tensile and compressive stresses will induce microscopic crack propagation if critical values are reached. Over time, crack propagation will continue until the crack reaches a critical length, at which time complete fracture initiates. When this active electrode material is fractured away, the battery will effectively lose capacity and maximum power output diminishes. Thus, understanding the relationship between stresses and imperfections during lithium ion intercalation can be beneficial to better advance the current battery technology.

    Olivine LiFePO4 is a brittle material and linear elastic fracture mechanics could be applied to better understand mixed-mode fractures in lithium-ion battery materials. Extensive theoretical and computational studies have focused on the growth of interfacial cracks of bi-materials, and on quantifying the extension of a crack and the elastic field near a crack tip [31,32]; the energy release rates (G) and stress intensity factors (K1 and K2) of engineering materials are generally discussed in this regard. Hutchinson and Suo have provided analytical energy release rates and stress intensity factors for interfacial cracks in isotropic bi-materials under mixed-mode loading [33]. Qian and Sun have extended the mixed-mode study to monoclinic and orthogonal bi-materials [34,35]. Sequentially, the development and application of the finite element-based virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) facilitated the analyses on fracture mechanics for orthogonal (orthorhombic) bi-materials [36,37,38,39,40]. Raju has calculated energy release rates via the VCCT with higher order and singular finite elements for isotropic materials [41]. Agrawal and Karlsson utilized the VCCT to obtain mixed-mode energy release rates and stress intensity factors for isotropic materials [40]. For details about the overview of the VCCT, please refer to studies by Krueger et al., Rybicki, Dattaguru, Xie and Agrawal [36,37,38,39,40].

    The current study aims to identify an optimal combination of the particle- and crack-size of LiFePO4 for better battery performance. Because reducing the LiFePO4 electrode particle size could effectively decrease stress inside the particles, in addition to reducing the diffusion path during electrochemical cycling [42,43]. The current study is designed to provide insight into the sub-micro scale fracture mechanisms within the cathode material by accomplishing the following objectives to help aid in the understanding and development of a longer lasting and more powerful battery: (1) Perform a finite element simulation to evaluate fracture mechanisms inside a single LiFePO4 particle due to the phase transformation; and (2) establish an energy-based approach to estimate the propensity of crack extension for lithium-ion battery materials.

    We achieve these objectives by utilizing the VCCT to study fracture mechanics in LiFePO4 battery materials under mixed-mode loading. Pre-existing cracks at the interface of orthotropic bi-materials are incorporated. Various particle and crack sizes are considered to illustrate the effects on the cracking information in LiFePO4 due to phase transformation. Our aim is to present an approach towards improving battery structural design by providing a better understanding of the micromechanics, as well as a basis for future fatigue analyses, which may incorporate a variety of other battery chemistries and additional fatigue life parameters.

    2. Materials and Method

    2.1. Model development

    To study fracture mechanics in LiFePO4 particles, VCCT with the ANSYS finite element software (ANSYS, Inc. Canonsburg, Pennsylvania) is utilized to obtain the energy release rates and stress intensity factors. Two-phase plate-like LiFePO4 finite element models are generated based on the separate experimental observations [15,27,44] and different orthotropic material properties are adopted for both phases [28]. An interfacial crack is considered to run parallel to the bc-plane (along the c-axis) where phase boundaries are present (Figure 1). Although crack extension is possible in other planes, literature and experimentation have reported that cracks are observed in the bc-plane between phases while advancing in the c-axis [15]. In the current study, an assumption was made that the cracks will extend along their original direction. Moreover, the only experimental data that was available was for the surface energy and the prediction of crack turning or kinking was beyond the scope of the investigation. However, there exists a slight possibility that the shear mode fracture toughness may be very small in these materials and the crack path may deviate from a straight line. Therefore, we assume that a crack extends along the interface and remains parallel to the bc-plane [15,27,29] (Figure 1). Based on the experimental observation [15], previous simulations [45,46,47,48], and LiFePO4 lattice constants of the unit cell—a = 10.3 Å, b = 6.0 Å, and c = 4.7 Å [49]—three differently sized plate-like LiFePO4 finite element models on the ac-plane are generated as follows: (a) 500 nm × 225 nm, (b) 200 nm × 90 nm, and (c) 100 nm × 45 nm, respectively. In general, a continuum mechanics-based finite element method is valid when the model size is above 25 nm, as several nano-scaled studies presented by Zhao et al. [22,50,51]. Furthermore, lithium-ions diffuse into LiFePO4 particles along the b-axis during the phase transformation; the elastic model is reduced to 2D by assuming plane stress and neglecting stresses in the b-direction, as described by Hu et al. [29]. A total of 21 finite element simulations are conducted, wherein the initial crack is considered to start from the top face with variable lengths of crack sizes 0.05-0.8 L/d, in which L represents the crack length and d represents the particle size along the c-axis (Figure 1). The initial crack mouth opening is set at 0.5 nm in the a-axis in the range of experimentally observed crack dimensions [27]. Strains were applied to the LiFePO4 phase according to the misfit strains previously measured and reported in the literature: expansion occurs along the a-direction (εa = 5.03%) and contraction occurs along the c-direction (εc = −1.9%) (Figure 1a) [52]. Of note, εb = 4.5%). Two-dimensional quadrilateral elements are used in the finite element analysis. Such eight-node parabolic elements allow for more flexibility and improved accuracy in contrast to four-node elements That is, the 8 noded parabolic quadrilateral element uses quadratic functions for the displacements, and the simulation shows the exact analytic solution for pure bending dominated problems even with a coarse mesh with only one element in depth [53,54]. The finite element models are densely meshed around the crack tip to a size of 50 nm (Figure 1b).

    Figure 1. (a) A representative orthotropic bi-material with variable lengths of crack sizes 0.05-0.8 L/d. Expansion occurs along the a-direction and contraction occurs along the c-direction when particles undergo phase changes [52]. (b) Two-dimensional finite element models are used in the analysis, and models are densely meshed around the crack tip to a size of 50 nm. Scale bar = 0.03 μm.

    2.2. Finite element method-based virtual crack closure technique (VCCT)

    The VCCT is used along with the finite element modeling package ANSYS to determine the energy release rates and stress intensity factors under mixed-mode loading. The theory behind the VCCT is that the energy needed to separate or slide a crack surface is the same as the energy needed to close the surface back on itself [36]. The tendency of a crack to extend, the energy release rates, and the stress intensity factors are calculated through command options in ANSYS [55] (Figure 2a), and they are currently not available on the graphical user interface of ANSYS. Stress intensity factors have been derived analytically for orthotropic bi-materials, as detailed in published studies [34,56,57]. Energy release rates can be calculated with relative displacements (u, w), reaction forces (X, Z), and a unit thickness t = 1, as shown in Equation 1 and Figure 2 [39]. From the VCCT and a few commands in ANSYS, the Mode 1 (tension mode) and Mode 2 (sliding shear mode) strain energy release rates for a flaw of given size in a two-phase LiFePO4 particle could be determined (Figure 2b-c):

    @{G_1} = \frac{{ - \left[{{X_1}\left( {\Delta {u_1}} \right) + {X_2}\left( {\Delta {u_2}} \right)} \right]}}{{2\Delta \alpha }} \qquad {G_2} = \frac{{ - \left[{{Z_1}\left( {\Delta {w_1}} \right) + {Z_2}\left( {\Delta {w_2}} \right)} \right]}}{{2\Delta \alpha }}@ (1)

    Figure 2. (a) The VCCT for 2-D quadrilateral elements with a unit thickness t. Energy release rates are calculated based on the crack size (Δa), reaction forces (Z and X), relative displacements (u, w, and a), and via the FEM-based VCCT from the command-coding interface of ANSYS. (b)-(c) Anticipated Mode 1 (tension mode) and Mode 2 (sliding shear mode) fractures for a two-phase LiFePO4 battery material under mixed-mode loading conditions.

    2.3. Crack extension

    A crack will advance if the total energy release rate for Mode 1 and Mode 2, GT= G1 + G2 , is larger than approximately twice the surface energy of the particle, i.e., GT > 2 g [29,58]. A first-principle analysis by Wang et al. has reported a g value of 0.66 N/m for LiFePO4 in the (100) crack face orientation [29,58]. In the current study, we collect finite element results satisfying GT > 2g, and the difference between these two energies (GT−2g) is used to predict crack extension. That is, crack extension is eminent and a crack will advance until the surface energy from the newly-formed crack faces bring the particle back to be equal to or larger than the strain energy release rate (Figure 3). In the current work, we follow steps in “Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics” detailed by Fischer-Cripps [59]: for a crack to extend, the rate of strain energy release per unit of crack extension must be at least equal to the rate of surface energy requirement [60]. Therefore, a 0.01-nm crack extension is set as a unit growth and the resulting crack growth (da) would be determined as follows: First, we calculate the difference between the GT and 2g. Second, the additional energy release rate for a unit of 0.01 nm crack extension is determined based on the crack surface areas. Third, the updated additional surface energy for a 0.01 nm crack extension is determined. Fourth, the crack extension is calculated since the relieved internal energy due to crack propagation should be balanced by the additional strain energy release rate, as shown in Figure 3.

    Figure 3. Crack extension calculation. The argument GT > 2γ is used to determine the required crack advancement (da) to reach mechanical equilibrium, where b is the particle size in the b-axis and g = 0.66 N/m [29,58].

    3. Results and Discussion

    The results of the finite element method-based VCCT indicate that normal stresses dominate as compared to shear stress throughout the particle (stress fields not shown). In particular, the Mode 1 fractures predominated for all models, as the energy release rate G1 is much larger than G2 for all particle sizes (Figure 4). The fracture mode is a result of applied boundary conditions (misfit strains due to phase transformation in the current study: εa = 5.03% and εc = −1.9%), anisotropic elastic moduli for LiFePO4 and FePO4 [28], and as a result, the energy release rates and the stress intensity factors are indicators of the state of energy or stress around the crack tip. Since the stiffness value of LiFePO4 from [28] along the a-axis is much smaller than in the other orthorhombic directions, the material is weaker in this direction, giving way to the splitting or opening Mode 1 type of fracture. Therefore, in the current study we focus on the discussion of Mode 1 fractures in LiFePO4 battery materials from the mixed-mode boundary condition.

    Figure 4. Energy release rates for two modes of fracture at crack tips with various L/d ratios. G1 is highly dependent on the crack size for three different particle sizes. It is observed that Mode 1 cracks are likely to occur and has higher tendency to propagate, especially when L/d ≈ 0.5-0.6.

    Several studies have shown that the energy release rate is proportional to the crack size since the energy release rate is the energy dissipated during fracture per unit of newly created fracture surface area [33]. The variation of energy release rates with respect to the crack-to-particle ratios for two fracture modes are shown in Figure 4. It is revealed that G1is highly dependent on the crack size for all three particle sizes. Comparing to the 2g = 1.32 N/m, smaller particles (100 nm × 45 nm) are able to better accommodate initial flaws without the crack propagation, i.e., L/d ≤ 0.2. In contrast, particles with a larger size (500 nm × 225 nm) could only accommodate initial flaws as small as L/d ≤0.03 by a linear extrapolation. Therefore, it is the L/d point that needs to be considered to determine if crack propagation occurs during the lithiation/delithiation process. Below L/d = 0.5 and 0.6, the energy release rates increase with the increased crack lengths and then begin to level off. It is concluded that crack propagation acts to relieve internal stresses due to misfit strain during the phase transformation of LiFePO4 materials, and it is particle-size and initial flaw-size dependent. Crack propagation due to mixed-mode loading is possible in other planes; however, experimentation has reported that cracks are observed between phases while propagating in the c-axis [15]. The olivine crystal structure of LiFePO4 and the Pauling's third rule support this observation: (100) planes are linked through stable, shared corner bonds between FeO6 octahedra and PO4 tetrahedra, while (010) planes are connected by weaker, edge-sharing bonds between FeO6 octahedra [27,52,61]. Lower energy release rates are observed in the Mode 2 fracture and exhibit less dependency on particle sizes. However, G1 and G2 both contribute to the GT for the crack extension. In contrast to the study by Hu et al. [29], a maximum value of the normalized energy release rate was identified; however, it is not clear which fracture mode is considered in their study. The approach in their study was to inversely look for a critical particle size d by solving boundary value problems, and the normalized energy release rate is a function of one component of the anisotropic stiffness matrix (c11) and the volume misfit along the c-axis (ec). The decreasing normalized energy release rate after L/d = 0.5 from Hu et al. could be attributed by several simplifications [29], such as the choice of the normalization where the other anisotropic effects of volume expansions were not incorporated.

    Stress intensity factors (K) are also obtained from the command-coding interface of ANSYS via the VCCT (Figure 2a), and the particle-size-dependent relationship of stress intensity factors and L/d is shown in Figure 5a. For larger particles (500 nm × 225 nm), it is observed that K1reaches a relative maximum value of 1.4 MPa-m1/2. For a particle size of 200 nm × 90 nm, K1 reaches a relative maximum value of 1.0 MPa-m1/2. For smaller particles (100 nm × 45 nm), it is observed that K1 reaches a relative maximum value of 0.6 MPa-m1/2 (Figure 5a). Our results indicate that K1is particle-size dependent, which is consistent with the observations made by Krstic and Khaund [62].

    Figure 5. (a) Mode 1 stress intensity factors at crack tips with various L/d ratios. K1 is highly dependent on the particle and crack sizes. (b) Computational model predictions of crack advancement (Mode 1) for three different particle sizes. Note that these simulations are not based on Paris’ law, but rather from systematic analyses of independent VCCT models (i.e., 16 models are solved to generate the 16 data points plotted above). It is observed that smaller particles exhibit faster crack propagation (i.e., a higher value for the exponent of ΔK1 in the best-fit equations appearing in the plot above).

    Further, to reveal the relationship between the crack advancement (da) and the change in the Mode 1 stress intensity factor for LiFePO4, the estimation is depicted in Figure 5b. The da is determined via the method described in Figure 3, and ΔK1 is determined from ranges of the stress intensity factor of Mode 1. It is observed that da vs. ΔK1 curves are particle-size dependent, wherein smaller particles exhibit faster crack extension (i.e., a higher value for the exponent of ΔK1 in the best-fit equations appearing in Figure 5b): the crack growth is proportional to the DK1 to the power of 4.6229 for particle size of 100 nm × 45 nm, and for particle size of 500 nm x 225 nm, the crack growth is related to the DK1 to the power of 1.3849 (Figure 5b). Detailed calculated data from the FEM-based VCCT are listed in Table 1.

    Table 1. Results from the FEM-based VCCT of lithium-ion battery materials for each particle size with various crack-to-particle ratios: Mode 1 stress intensity factor (K1), total energy release rate (GT), twice of the surface energies (2γ), the energy difference between them (ΔE = GT - 2γ), the required additional strain energy release rate per 0.01 nm crack growth (ER), the required additional strain energy release rate per 0.01-nm crack growth (Es), and the required crack advancement (da).
    a × b × c = 500 nm × 300 nm × 225 nm
    L/dKI (MPa-m1/2)GT (N/m)2γ (N/m)ΔE (N/m)ER per 0.01 nm (Joules)ES per 0.01 nm (Joules)da (m)
    0.050.6595.4621.324.1422.485×10-173.960×10-186.275×10-11
    0.10.8335.9221.324.6022.761×10-173.960×10-186.972×10-11
    0.21.1368.7441.327.4244.454×10-173.960×10-181.125×10-11
    0.31.31011.0271.329.7075.824×10-173.960×10-181.471×10-11
    0.41.40312.3731.3211.0536.632×10-173.960×10-181.675×10-11
    0.61.45613.0531.3211.7337.040×10-173.960×10-181.778×10-11
    a × b × c = 200 nm × 120 nm × 90 nm
    L/dKI (MPa-m1/2)GT (N/m)2γ (N/m)ΔE (N/m)ER per 0.01 nm (Joules)ES per 0.01 nm (Joules)da (m)
    0.050.3540.0681.32-1.252---
    0.10.5310.0791.32-1.241---
    0.20.6743.4811.322.1615.185×10-181.584×10-183.273×10-11
    0.30.7794.4001.323.0807.393×10-181.584×10-184.667×10-11
    0.40.8364.8501.323.5308.472×10-181.584×10-185.348×10-11
    0.50.8615.1761.323.8569.254×10-181.584×10-185.842×10-11
    0.60.9025.2201.323.9009.361×10-181.584×10-185.910×10-11
    0.70.9035.2111.323.8919.337×10-181.584×10-185.895×10-11
    0.80.9265.3051.323.9859.564×10-181.584×10-186.038×10-11
    a × b × c = 100 nm × 60 nm × 45 nm
    L/dKI (MPa-m1/2)GT (N/m)2γ (N/m)ΔE (N/m)ER per 0.01 nm (Joules)ES per 0.01 nm (Joules)da (m)
    0.050.2970.0291.32-1.291--
    0.10.3750.0421.32-1.278--
    0.20.5101.7401.320.4205.044×10-197.920×10-196.369×10-12
    0.30.5892.2001.320.8801.055×10-197.920×10-191.332×10-12
    0.40.6292.4701.321.1501.380×10-197.920×10-191.742×10-12
    0.60.6522.6071.321.2871.545×10-197.920×10-191.951×10-12
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Though the particle sizes chosen for the study retain the same aspect ratio, it is believed the surface energy has greater effects for smaller particles [63], where the same surface energy for three particle-size models are adopted, i.e., g = 0.66 N/m [58]. That is, for a particle with a smaller size, the newly created surface area has a stronger effect since crack propagation in a smaller particle acts to relieve more internal stresses. As a result, less strain energy release rates and stress-intensity factors are found in smaller particles (Figures 4 and 5a). In addition, a convergence test was performed in our finite element analysis. It has been observed that models beyond L/d = 0.6 provide similar strain energy release rates and stress intensity factors, suggesting that L/d = 0.6 is the critical value for both computational simulations and battery materials design.

    In general, an empirical Paris’ Law is used to describe crack propagation in engineering materials. However, fatigue experiments are not currently available for nanosized LiFePO4 particles. The current study specifically aims to provide a method that estimates crack advancement based on the effects of particle and crack sizes under mixed-mode loading. The current study does not aim to estimate material parameters from the Paris’ Law for LiFePO4 particles. Our approach is in contrast to that of Deshpande et al. [64], who utilized Paris’ Law and incorporated material parameters for LiFePO4 to predict battery life (i.e., numbers of cycles). In their study, an isotropic core-shell model incorporating chemical and mechanical degradation was implemented, considering a surface crack that grows with each charge-discharge cycle [64].

    The rate of discharge will determine the resultant stresses within the material, which will in turn alter the energy release rates and stress intensity factors at a crack in the particle. Therefore a current-rate-dependent crack propagation analysis for LiFePO4 is currently being developed in our research group. In general, larger stresses over a shorter period of time may induce cracking more readily than for slower discharging rates; this is due to the limited volumetric expansion rate being unable to satisfying the rate of lithium diffusivity during fast discharging, similar to rush hour traffic in limited highway space. Zhu et al. [20] have reported current density dependent fracture mechanic characteristics for another battery chemistry, LiMn2O4, wherein isotropic spherical and ellipsoidal particles are considered. They have concluded that crack propagation occurs at the center of the particle even during relatively low current density discharging [20].

    Molecular dynamic (MD) simulation has been a powerful tool to numerically solve the classical equations of motion for a system at a smaller-scale. It has been widely used to understand the behavior of liquid electrolytes for lithium-ion batteries to improve the performance of portable electronics devices, electric vehicles, and hybrid electric vehicles. However, such considerations represent limitations of our study, as we did not have the computational tools in the present study. We have chosen to conducta continuum mechanics-based finite element analyses based available experimental and computational results from the literatures in which particles and models are on the same size order of ours. In this case, we could use the available surface energy values from the literature to calculate the crack extension, as shown in Table 1. Moreover, since our current study mainly focuses on interface-diffusion limited lithium-ion battery materials, an improved model by using MD could be developed to better predict interface diffusion and failure. Another limitation in the current study lies on the small element size at the crack tip in which a MD simulation is regarded as a better choice. To this matter, the logical approach in the desire to create truly multiple scale simulations that exist at disparate length and timescales has been to couple MD and FE. Unfortunately, the coupling of these methods is not straightforward since the major problem in multi-scale simulations is that of pathological wave reflection, which occurs at the interface between the MD and FE regions. We did not have the coupled MD and FE computational tools in the present study. Therefore, the idea of meshing the finite element region down to a small-scale was one of our first attempts to eliminate spurious wave reflections, which has been generally reported at the MD-FEM interface. To this end, we are in the process by adopting MD simulations to improve our computational technique.

    4. Conclusions

    To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study utilizing the finite element method-based VCCT to obtain cracking information in LiFePO4 battery materials. Various lengths of interfacial cracks in orthotropic bi-materials are incorporated. A method is established to calculate the amount of crack propagation for lithium-ion battery materials (Figure 3 and Figure 5b). It is observed that energy release rates, stress intensity factors, and crack propagation are all particle- and crack-size-dependent (Figures 4-5). Therefore, one potential future consideration is to reduce the LiFePO4 electrode particle size to allow initial flaws during material processing (Figure 4) and to effectively decrease stress inside the particles (Figure 5a) in addition to reducing the diffusion path for better battery performance [42,43].

    The current study provides an approach towards improving battery structural design by providing a better understanding of the micromechanics, as well as a basis for future fatigue analyses, which may incorporate a variety of other battery chemistries and additional fatigue life parameters. Thus, the current study has identified factors that play an important role in inducing fracture, and the study also provides insight into factors that can be optimized to minimize any detrimental capacity loss in a battery. This research will hopefully elucidate a relationship between micro-mechanics and battery usage so as to help in the design of a higher performance, longer lasting battery for the future.

    Conflict of Interest

    All authors declare no conflict of interest in this paper.



    [1] Ezirim O, Okpoechi C (2020) Community-driven development strategy for sustainable infrastructure. J Human Earth Future 1: 48-59. https://doi.org/10.28991/HEF-2020-01-02-01 doi: 10.28991/HEF-2020-01-02-01
    [2] Tzanakakis V, Paranychianakis N, Angelakis A (2020) Water supply and water scarcity. Water 12: 2347. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092347 doi: 10.3390/w12092347
    [3] Boretti A, Rosa L (2019) Reassessing the projections of the world water development report. NPJ Clean Water 2: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41545-019-0039-9 doi: 10.1038/s41545-018-0028-4
    [4] Nyika J (2020) Climate change situation in Kenya and measures towards adaptive management in the water sector. IJESGT 11: 34-47. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJESGT.2020070103 doi: 10.4018/IJESGT.2020070103
    [5] Van Vliet M, Jones E, Florke M, et al. (2021) Global water security including surface water quality and expansions of clean water technologies. Environ Res Lett 16: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abbfc3 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abbfc3
    [6] Mateo-Sagasta J, Zadeh S, Turral, H (2017) Water pollution from agriculture: a global review. Food and Agriculture Organization and International Water Management Institute, Colombo.
    [7] Nyika J, Onyari E (2019) Hydrogeochemical analysis and spatial distribution of groundwater quality in Roundhill landfill vicinity of South Africa. Air Soil Water Res 12: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178622119872771 doi: 10.1177/1178622119872771
    [8] Khalid S, Shahid M, Bibi I, et al. (2018) A review of environmental contamination and health risk assessment of wastewater use for crop irrigation with a focus on low and high-income countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15: 895. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050895 doi: 10.3390/ijerph15050895
    [9] Fayomi G. Mini S, Fayomi O, et al. (2019) A mini review on the impact of sewage disposal on environment and ecosystem. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 331: 012040. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/331/1/012040 doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/331/1/012040
    [10] Kerich E (2020) Households drinking water sources and treatment methods options in a regional irrigation scheme. J Human Earth Future 1: 10-19. doi: 10.28991/HEF-2020-01-01-02
    [11] Omole D, Chichezie T, Akpan V (2021) Determination of volume of wastewater generated in a university campus. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 655: 012086. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/655/1/012086 doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/655/1/012086
    [12] Ferrato N, Torretta V (2019) Waste mismanagement in developing countries: a review of global issues. Int J Environ. Res Public Health 16: 1060. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16061060 doi: 10.3390/ijerph16061060
    [13] Gallelo-Valero L, Moral-Parajes E, Roman-Sanchez I (2021) Wastewater treatment costs: a research overview through bibliometric analysis. Sustainability 13: 5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095066 doi: 10.3390/su13095066
    [14] Kim S, Chu K, Al-Hamadani Y, et al. (2018) Removal of contaminants of emerging concern by membranes in water and wastewater: A review. Chem Eng J 335: 896-914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.11.044 doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2017.11.044
    [15] Mrozik A (2021) Microbial action in wastewater and sludge. Water 13: 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13060846 doi: 10.3390/w13060846
    [16] Nyika J, Onyari E, Dinka M, et al. (2021) A review on methods of assessing pollution levels from landfills in South Africa. Int J Environ. Waste Manage 28: 436-455. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEWM.2021.118859 doi: 10.1504/IJEWM.2021.118859
    [17] Sharma P, Kumar S (2021) Bioremediation of heavy metals from industrial effluents by endophytes and their metabolic activity: recent advances. Bioresour Technol 339: 125589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125589 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125589
    [18] Wu G, Yin Q (2020) Microbial niche nexus sustaining biological wastewater treatment. NPJ Clean Water 33: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41545-020-00080-4 doi: 10.1038/s41545-020-00080-4
    [19] Buaisha M, Balku S, Yaman S (2020) Heavy metal removal investigation in conventional activated sludge. Civ Eng J 6: 470-478. http://dx.doi.org/10.28991/cej-2020-03091484 doi: 10.28991/cej-2020-03091484
    [20] Mirra R, Ribarov C, Valchev D, et al. (2020) Towards energy efficient onsite wastewater treatment. Civ Eng J 6: 1218-1226. https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-2020-03091542 doi: 10.28991/cej-2020-03091542
    [21] Chirisa I, Bandako E, Matamanda A, et al. (2017) Decentralized domestic wastewater systems in developing countries: the case study of Harare (Zimbabwe). Appl Water Sci 7: 1069-1078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-016-0377-4 doi: 10.1007/s13201-016-0377-4
    [22] Furrer V (2018) Remote monitoring of on-site wastewater treatment plants by means of low-maintenance sensors data collection and interpretation from a SBR in operation. MSc thesis, ETH Zurich.
    [23] Schneider Y, Carbajal P, Furrer V, et al. (2019) Beyond signal quality: The value of unmaintained pH, dissolved oxygen, and oxidation-reduction potential sensors for remote performance monitoring of on-site sequencing batch reactors. Water Res 161: 639-651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.06.007 doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.06.007
    [24] Armah E, Chetty M, Adedeji A, et al. (2020) Emerging trends in wastewater treatment technologies: the current perspective. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93898
    [25] Rout P, Zhang T, Bhunia P, et al. (2021) Treatment technologies for emerging contaminants in wastewater treatment plants: a review. Sci Total Environ 753: 141990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141990 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141990
    [26] He S, Zhong L, Duan J, Feng Y, et al. (2017) Bioremediation of wastewater by iron oxide biochar nanocomposites loaded with photosynthetic bacteria. Front Microbiol 8: 823. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00823 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00823
    [27] Kaleeswari K, Johnson T, Vijayalakshmi C (2018) Influencing factors on water treatment plant performance analysis using fuzzy logic technique. Int J Pure Appl Math 118: 29-38.
    [28] Nyika J (2021) Tolerance of microorganisms to heavy metals. In Recent advancements in bioremediation of metal contaminants 2021: 19-35. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4888-2.ch002 doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4888-2.ch002
    [29] Sharma I (2021) Bioremediation techniques for polluted environment: concept, advantages, limitations and prospects. In Trace metals in the environment-new approaches and recent advances. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90453 doi: 10.5772/intechopen.90453
    [30] Sharma P, Singh P (2021) Identification and profiling of microbial community from industrial sludge. Arch Microbiol 204: 234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-022-02831-y doi: 10.1007/s00203-022-02831-y
    [31] Seyki-Out A, Smith A (2020) Bioremediation: how to decrease greenhouse gas emissions through cattle. URNCST Journal 4: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.192 doi: 10.26685/urncst.192
    [32] Arora N (2018) Bioremediation: a green approach for restoration of polluted ecosystem. Environ Sustain 1: 305-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-018-00036-y doi: 10.1007/s42398-018-00036-y
    [33] Lorenzo V (2017) Seven microbial bio-processes to help the planet. Microb Biotechnol 10: 995-998. https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1751-7915.12816 doi: 10.1111/1751-7915.12816
    [34] Sharma J (2019) Advantages and limitations of in situ methods of bioremediation. Recent Adv Biol Med 5: 955923. http://dx.doi.org/10.18639/RABM.2019.955923 doi: 10.18639/RABM.2019.955923
    [35] Martinez-Gallardo M, Lopez M, Jurado M, et al. (2020) Bioremediation of olive mill wastewater sediments in evaporation ponds through in situ composting assisted by bioaugmentation. Sci Total Environ 703: 135537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135537 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135537
    [36] Srivastava J, Naraian R, Kalra S, et al. (2014) Advances in microbial bioremediation and factors influencing the process. Int J Environ Sci Technol 11: 1787-1800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-013-0412-z doi: 10.1007/s13762-013-0412-z
    [37] Boopathy R (2000) Factors limiting bioremediation technologies. Bioresour Technol 74: 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00144-3 doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00144-3
    [38] Aragaw T (2020) Functions of various bacteria for specific pollutants degradation and their application in wastewater treatment: a review. Int J Environ Sci Technol 18: 2063-2076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-03022-2 doi: 10.1007/s13762-020-03022-2
    [39] Igiri B, Okoduwa S, Idoko G (2018) Toxicity and bioremediation of heavy metals contaminated ecosystem from tannery wastewater: A review. J Toxicol 2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2568038 doi: 10.1155/2018/2568038
    [40] Akpor O, Otohinoyi D, Olaolu T, et al. (2014) Pollutants in wastewater effluents: impacts and remediation processes. Int J Environ Res Earth Sci 3: 50-59.
    [41] Abatenh E, Gizaw B, Tsegaye Z, et al. (2017) The role of microorganisms in bioremediation- a review. Open J Environ Biol 1: 38-46. https://doi.org/10.17352/ojeb.000007 doi: 10.17352/ojeb.000007
    [42] Goswami M, Chakraborty P, Mukherjee K, et al. (2018) Bioaugmentation and biostimulation: a potential strategy for environmental remediation. J Microbiol Exp 6: 223-231. https://doi.org/10.15406/jmen.2018.06.00219 doi: 10.1186/s40168-018-0606-1
    [43] Abdulsalam S, Bugaje M, Adefila S, et al. (2010) Comparison of biostimulation and bioaugmentation for remediation of soil contaminated with spent motor oil. Braz Arch Biol Technol 52: 747-754. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03326208 doi: 10.1007/BF03326208
    [44] Das N, Chandran P (2010) Microbial degradation of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminants: an overview. Biotechnol Res Int 2010: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/941810 doi: 10.4061/2011/941810
    [45] Ogbeh G, Tsokar T, Salifu E (2018) Optimization of nutrients requirements for bioremediation of spent-engine oil contaminated soils. Environ Eng Res 24: 484-494. https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2018.237 doi: 10.4491/eer.2018.237
    [46] Bahmani F, Ataei S, Mikaill A (2018) The effect of moisture content variation on the bioremediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils: modelling and experimental investigation. J. Environ Anal Chem 5: 1000236. https://doi.org/10.4172/2380-2391.1000236 doi: 10.4172/2380-2391.1000236
    [47] Ahmad F, Zhu D, Sun J (2021) Bacterial chemotaxis: a way forward to aromatic compounds biodegradation. Environ Sci Eu 32: 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-020-00329-2 doi: 10.1186/s12302-020-00329-2
    [48] Ojha N, Karn R, Abbas S, Bhugra S (2021) Bioremediation of industrial wastewater: a review. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci 796: 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/796/1/012012 doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/796/1/012012
    [49] Pandey G, Jain R (2002) Bacterial chemotaxis toward environmental pollutants: role in bioremediation. Appl Environ Microbiol 68: 5789-5795. https://doi.org/10.1128%2FAEM.68.12.5789-5795.2002 doi: 10.1128/AEM.68.12.5789-5795.2002
    [50] Gaikwad G, Wate S, Ramteke D, et al. (2014) Development of microbial consortia for the effective treatment of complex wastewater. J Bioremed Biodeg 5: 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2155-6199.1000227 doi: 10.4172/2155-6199.1000227
    [51] Wang Q, Yang M, Song X, et al. (2019) Aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation off 1, 2-dibromoethane by a microbial consortium under simulated groundwater conditions. Int. J. Environ Res Public Health 16: 3775. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193775 doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193775
    [52] Efeovbokhan V, Hymore F, Ayoola A, et al. (2014) Comparison of aerobic and anaerobic bioremediation of polluted water samples. Am Int J Contemp Res 4: 120-127.
    [53] Coelho L, Rezende H, Coelho L, et al (2015) Bioremediation of polluted waters using microorganisms. Advances in bioremediation of wastewater and polluted soil 10: 60700. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/60770 doi: 10.5772/60770
    [54] Bhandari S, Poudel D, Marahatha R, et al. (2021) Microbial enzymes used in bioremediation. J Chem 2021. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8849512 doi: 10.1155/2021/8849512
    [55] Guengerich F (2010) Mechanisms of cytochrome P450 catalyzed oxidation. ACS Catal 8: 10964-10976. https://doi.org/10.1021%2Facscatal.8b03401 doi: 10.1021%2Facscatal.8b03401
    [56] Shraddha R, Shekher S, Sehgal S, et al. (2011) Laccase: microbial sources, production, purification and potential biotechnological applications. Enzyme Res 2011: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/217861 doi: 10.4061/2011/217861
    [57] Dotaniya M, Aparna K, Dotaniya C, et al. (2019) Role of soil enzymes in sustainable crop production. Enzyme Food Biotechnol 2019: 569-589. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813280-7.00033-5 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-813280-7.00033-5
    [58] Razzaq A. Shamsi S, Ali A, et al. (2019) Microbial proteases applications. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 7: 110. https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffbioe.2019.00110 doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00110
    [59] Alneyadi A, Rauf M, Ashraf S (2018) Oxidoreductases for the remediation of organic pollutants in water - a critical review. Crit Rev Biotechnol 38: 971-988. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2017.1423275 doi: 10.1080/07388551.2017.1423275
    [60] Barber E, Liu Z, Smith S (2020) Organic contaminant biodegradation by oxidoreductase enzymes in wastewater treatment. Microorganisms 8: 122. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fmicroorganisms8010122 doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8010122
    [61] Dzionek A, Wojcieszynska D, Guzik U (2016) Natural carriers in bioremediation: a review. Electronic J Biotechnol 23: 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejbt.2016.07.003 doi: 10.1016/j.ejbt.2016.07.003
    [62] Saha P, Rao B (2021) Immobilization as a powerful bioremediation tool for abatement of dye pollution: a review. Environ Rev 29: 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2020-0074 doi: 10.1139/er-2019-0072
    [63] Mehrotra T, Dev S, Banerjee A, et al. (2021) Use of immobilized bacteria for environmental bioremediation: a review. J Environ Chem Eng 9: 105920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.105920 doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2021.105920
    [64] Andreolli M, Lampis S, Brignoli P (2015) Bioaugmentation and biostimulation as strategies for the bioremediation of a burned woodland soil contaminated by toxic hydrocarbons: a comparative study. J Environ Manage 153: 121-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.02.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.02.007
    [65] Cortes M, de Carvalho C (2015) Effect of carbon sources on lipid accumulation in Rhodococcus cells. Biochem. Eng J 94: 100-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2014.11.017 doi: 10.1016/j.bej.2014.11.017
    [66] Sharma P (2022) Role and significance of biofilm-forming microbes in phytoremediation-a review. Environ Technol Inno 25: 102182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2021.102182 doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2021.102182
    [67] Sharma P, Chaturvedi P, Chandra R, et al. (2022) Identification of heavy metals tolerant Brevundimonas sp. from rhizospheric zone of Saccharum Munja L. and their efficacy in in-situ phytoremediation. Chemosphere 295: 133823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.133823 doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.133823
    [68] Dixit R, Malaviya D, Pandiyan K, et al. (2015) Bioremediation of heavy metals from soil and aquatic environment: an overview of principles and criteria of fundamental processes. Sustainability 7: 2189-2212. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7022189 doi: 10.3390/su7022189
    [69] Wu G, Kang H, Zhang X, et al. (2010) A critical review on the bio-removal of hazardous heavy metals from contaminated soils: issues, progress, eco-environmental concerns and opportunities. J Hazard Mater 174: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.09.113 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.09.113
    [70] Ramasamy K, Kamaludeen S, Parwin B (2007) Bioremediation of metals microbial processes and techniques. In Environmental Bioremediation Technologies 2007: 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34793-4_7 doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-34793-4_7
    [71] Kumaran N, Sundaramanicam A, Bragadeeswaran S (2011) Adsorption studies on heavy metals by isolated cyanobacterial strain (nostoc sp.) from Uppanar estuarine water, southeast coast of India. J Appl Sci Res 7: 1609-1615.
    [72] Mane P, Bhosle A (2012) Bioremoval of some metals by living algae Spirogyra sp. and Spirullina sp. from aqueous solution. Int J Environ Res 6: 571-576. https://dx.doi.org/10.22059/ijer.2012.527 doi: 10.22059/ijer.2012.527
    [73] Ashokkumar P, Loashini V, Bhavya V (2017) Effect of pH, temperature and biomass on biosorption of heavy metals by Sphaerotilus natans. IJMM 6: 32-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-386X(00)00195-X doi: 10.1016/S0304-386X(00)00195-X
    [74] Muneer B, Iqbal M, Shakoori F, et al. (2013) Tolerance and biosorption of mercury by microbial consortia: potential use in bioremediation of wastewater. Pak J Zool 45: 247-254.
    [75] Benazir J, Suganthi R, Rajvel D, et al. (2010) Bioremediation of chromium in tannery effluent by microbial consortia. Afr J Biotechnol 9: 3140-3143.
    [76] De J, Ramaiah N, Vardanyan L (2008) Detoxification of toxic heavy metals by marine bacteria highly resistant to mercury. Mar Biotechnol 10: 471-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10126-008-9083-z doi: 10.1007/s10126-008-9083-z
    [77] Bhattacharya M, Guchhait S, Biswas D, et al. (2015) Waste lubricating oil removal in a batch reactor by mixed bacterial consortium: a kinetic study. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 38: 2095-2106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-015-1449-9 doi: 10.1007/s00449-015-1449-9
    [78] Kumar R, Bhatia D, Singh R, et al. (2011) Sorption of heavy metals from electroplating effluent using immobilized biomass Trichoderma viride in a continuous packed-bed column. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 65: 1133-1139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2011.09.003 doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2011.09.003
    [79] Marzan W, Hossain M, Mina A, et al. (2017) Isolation and biochemical characterization of heavy-metal resistant bacteria from tannery effluent in Chittagong city, Bangladesh: Bioremediation viewpoint. Egypt J Aquat Res 43: 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejar.2016.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ejar.2016.11.002
    [80] Bharagava N, Mishra S (2018) Hexavalent chromium reduction potential of Cellulosimicrobium sp. isolated from common effluent treatment plant of tannery industries. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 147: 102-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.08.040 doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.08.040
    [81] Zakaria A, Zakaria Z, Surif S, et al. (2007) Hexavalent chromium reduction by Acinetobacter haemolyticus isolated from heavy-metal contaminated wastewater. J Hazard Mater 146: 30-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.11.052 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.11.052
    [82] Gunasundari D, Muthukumar K (2013) Simultaneous Cr (Ⅵ) reduction and phenol degradation using Stenotrophomonas sp. isolated from tannery effluent contaminated soil. ESPR 20: 6563-6573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-1718-6 doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-1718-6
    [83] Gavrilescu M (2004) Removal of heavy metals from the environment by biosorption. Eng Life Sci. 4: 219-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/elsc.200420026 doi: 10.1002/elsc.200420026
    [84] Vijayaraghavan K, Yun YS (2008) Bacterial biosorbents and biosorption. Biotechnol Adv 26: 266-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.02.002 doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.02.002
    [85] Godlewska-Zyłkiewicz B (2006) Microorganisms in inorganic chemical analysis. Anal Bioanal Chem Res 384: 114-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-005-0142-2 doi: 10.1007/s00216-005-0142-2
    [86] Jha S, Dikshit S, Pandy G (2011) Comparative study of agitation rate and stationary phase for the removal of Cu2+ by A. lentulus. Int J Pharm Biol Sci 2: 208-211.
    [87] Pardo R, Herguedas M, Barrado E, et al. (2003) Biosorption of cadmium, copper, lead and zinc by inactive biomass of Pseudomonas putida. Anal Bioanal Chem 376: 26-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-1843-z doi: 10.1007/s00216-003-1843-z
    [88] Viti C, Pace A, Giovannetti L (2003) Characterization of Cr (Ⅵ)-resistant bacteria isolated from chromium-contaminated soil by tannery activity. Curr Microbiol 46: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-002-3800-z doi: 10.1007/s00284-002-3800-z
    [89] Kaur S, Roy A (2020) Bioremediation of heavy metals from wastewater using nanomaterials. Environ Dev Sustain 23: 9617-9640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01078-1 doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-01078-1
    [90] Wang S, Liu T, Xiao X, et al. (2021) Advances in microbial remediation for heavy metal treatment: a mini review. J Leather Sci Eng 3: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42825-020-00042-z doi: 10.1186/s42825-020-00042-z
    [91] Selvi A, Rajasekar A, Theerthagiri J, et al. (2019) Integrated remediation processes toward heavy metal removal/recovery from various environs- a review. Front Environ Sci 7: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2019.00066 doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2019.00001
    [92] Gul U (2018) Bioremediation of dyes in textile wastewater. Derleme 11: 24-28.
    [93] Radia J, Romana S (2019) Biodegradation of synthetic dyes of textile effluent by microorganisms: an environmental and economically sustainable approach. Eur J Microbiol Immunol 9: 114-118. https://doi.org/10.1556%2F1886.2019.00018 doi: 10.1556/1886.2019.00018
    [94] Sneha U, Poornima R, Sridhar S (2013) Decolorization of synthetic textile dyes using Pseudomonas putida. J Chem Pharm Res 5: 219-225.
    [95] Kalyani D, Telke A, Dhanve R, et al. (2009) Eco-friendly biodegradation and detoxification of Reactive Red 2 textile dye by newly isolated Pseudomonas sp. SUK1. J Hazard Mater 163: 735-742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.020 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.020
    [96] Aftab U, Kan M, Mahfooz M, et al. (2011) Decolorization and degradation of textile azo dyes by Corynebacterium sp. isolated from industrial effluent. Pak J Zool 43: 1-8.
    [97] Sivaraj R, Dorthy C, Venckatesh R (2011) Isolation, characterization and growth kinetics of bacteria metabolizing textile effluent. J Biosci Technol 2: 324-330. https://doi.org/10.12691/ijebb-4-2-2 doi: 10.12691/ijebb-4-2-2
    [98] Shah M, Patel K, Nair S, et al. (2013) An innovative approach to biodegradation of textile dye (remazol black B) by Bacillus Spp. Int J Environ Bioremediat Biodegrad 1: 43-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.12691/ijebb-1-2-2 doi: 10.12691/ijebb-1-2-2
    [99] Jaiswal S, Gomashe A (2017) Bioremediation of textile azo dyes by newly isolated Bacillus sp. from dye contaminated soil. Int J Biotechnol Biochem 13: 147-153.
    [100] Gul U (2013) The Treatment of dyeing wastewater including reactive dyes (Reactive Red RB, Reactive Black B, Remazol Blue) and Methylene Blue by fungal biomass. Water SA 39: 593-598. https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v39i5.2 doi: 10.4314/wsa.v39i5.2
    [101] Steeve M, Christiane A, Jean-Bosco S, et al. (2014). Discoloration and biodegradation of two dyes by white-rot fungi Perreniporia tephropora MUCL 47500 isolated in Gabon. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 3: 731-741.
    [102] Ramalingam S, Saraswathy N, Shanmugapriya S, et al. (2010) Decolorization of textile dyes by Aspergillus tamari, mixed fungal culture and Peniceillium purpurogenum. J Sci Ind Res 69: 151-153.
    [103] Ngieng N, Zulkharnain A, Roslan H, et al. (2013) Decolorization of synthetic dyes by endophytic fungal flora isolated from Senduduk plant (Melastoma malabathricum). International Scholarly Research Notices 2013. https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/260730 doi: 10.5402/2013/260730
    [104] Cheng W, Sim H, Ahmad S, et al. (2016) Characterization of an azo-dye-degrading white rot fungus isolated from Malaysia. Mycosphere 7: 560-569. doi: 10.5943/mycosphere/7/5/3
    [105] Barathi S, Vasudevan N (2001) Utilization of petroleum hydrocarbons by Pseudomonas fluorescens isolated from a petroleum-contaminated soil. Environ Int 26: 413-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-4120(01)00021-6 doi: 10.1016/S0160-4120(01)00021-6
    [106] Fritsche W, Hofrichter M (2000) Aerobic degradation by microorganisms. Environmental Processes- Soil Decontamination 2000: 146-155.
    [107] Karlapudi A, Venkateswarulu T, Tammineedi J, et al. (2018) Role of biosurfactants in bioremediation of oil pollution- a review. Petroleum 4: 241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2018.03.007 doi: 10.1016/j.petlm.2018.03.007
    [108] Xu X, Liu W, Tian S, et al. (2018) Petroleum hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria for the remediation of oil pollution under aerobic conditions: a perspective analysis. Front Microbiol 9: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02885 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00001
    [109] Kleindienst S, Paul H, Joye B (2015) Using dispersants after oil spills: impacts on the composition and activity of microbial communities. Nat Rev Microbiol 13: 388-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro3452 doi: 10.1038/nrmicro3452
    [110] Tao K, Liu X, Chen X, et al. (2017) Biodegradation of crude oil by a defined co-culture of indigenous bacterial consortium and exogenous Bacillus subtilis Bioresour. Technol 224: 327-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.073 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.073
    [111] Wang C, Liu X, Guo J, et al. (2018) Biodegradation of marine oil spill residues using aboriginal bacterial consortium based on Penglai 19-3 oil spill accident. China. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 159: 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.04.059 doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.04.059
    [112] Pedro P, Francisco J, Joao F, et al. (2014) DNA damage induced by hydroquinone can be prevented by fungal detoxification. Toxicol Rep 1: 1096-1105. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.toxrep.2014.10.024 doi: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2014.10.024
    [113] Safiyanu I, Isah A, Abubakar U, et al. (2015) Review on comparative study on bioremediation for oil spills using microbes. Res J Pharm Biol Chem Sci 6: 783-790.
    [114] Simarro R, Gonzalez N, Bautista L, et al. (2013) Assessment of the efficiency of in situ bioremediation techniques in a creosote polluted soil: change in bacterial community. J Hazard Mater 262: 158-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.08.025 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.08.025
    [115] Hesham A, Khan S, Tao Y, et al. (2012) Biodegradation of high molecular weight PAHs using isolated yeast mixtures: application of metagenomic methods for community structure analyses. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 19: 3568-3578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-0919-8 doi: 10.1007/s11356-012-0919-8
    [116] Yadav M, Singh S, Sharma J, et al. (2011) Oxidation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons in systems containing water miscible organic solvents by the lignin peroxidase of Gleophyllum striatum MTCC-1117. Environ Technol 32: 1287-1294. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2010.535177 doi: 10.1080/09593330.2010.535177
    [117] Aranda E, Ullrich R, Hofrichter M (2010) Conversion of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, methyl naphthalenes and dibenzofuran by two fungal peroxygenases. Biodegradation 21: 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-009-9299-2 doi: 10.1007/s10532-009-9299-2
    [118] Erika A, Vivian B, Claudia C, et al. (2013) Biodegradation of phenol in static cultures by Penicillium chrysogenum erk1: catalytic abilities and residual phytotoxicity. Rev Argent Microbiol 44: 113-121.
    [119] Kehinde F, Isaac S (2016) Effectiveness of augmented consortia of Bacillus coagulans, Citrobacter koseri and Serratia ficaria in the degradation of diesel polluted soil supplemented with pig dung. Afr J Microbiol Res 10: 1637-1644. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/AJMR2016.8249 doi: 10.5897/AJMR2016.8249
    [120] Abha S, Vinay K, Srivastava J (2013) Assessment of bioremediation of oil and phenol contents in refinery waste water via bacterial consortium. J Pet Environ Biotechnol 4: 1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7463.1000145 doi: 10.4172/2157-7463.1000145
    [121] Aliaa M, Eltayeb K, Mostafa A, et al. (2016) Biodegradation of industrial oil-polluted wastewater in Egypt by bacterial consortium immobilized in different types of carriers. Pol J Environ Stud 25: 1901-1909. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/62301 doi: 10.15244/pjoes/62301
    [122] Sukumar S, Nirmala P (2016) Screening of diesel oil degrading bacteria from petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil. Int J Adv Res Biol Sci 3: 18-22. doi: 10.22192/ijarbs.2016.03.10.004
    [123] Szulc A, Ambrożewicz D, Sydow M, et al. (2014) The influence of bioaugmentation and biosurfactant addition on bioremediation efficiency of diesel-oil contaminated soil: feasibility during field studies. J Environ Manage 132: 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.006 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.006
    [124] Divya M, Aanand S, Srinivasan A, et al. (2015) Bioremediation-an ecofriendly tool for effluent treatment: a review. International J Appl Res 1: 530-537.
    [125] Maulin P (2017) Environmental bioremediation of industrial effluent. J Mol Biol Biotechnol 2: 1-3.
    [126] Dubey S, Dubey J, Mehra S, et al. (2011) Potential use of cyanobacterial species in bioremediation of industrial effluents. Afr J Biotechnol 10: 1125-1132. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB10.908 doi: 10.5897/AJB10.908
    [127] Brar A, Kumar M, Vivekanand V, et al. (2017) Photoautotrophic microorganisms and bioremediation of industrial effluent: current status and future prospects. 3 biotech 7: 18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-0600-5 doi: 10.1007/s13205-017-0600-5
    [128] Murugesan K (2003) Bioremediation of paper and pulp mill effluents. Indian J Exp Biol 41: 1239-1248.
    [129] Kumar A, Chandra R (2020) Ligninolytic enzymes and its mechanisms for degradation of lignocellulosic waste in environment. Heliyon 6: e03170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03170 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03170
    [130] Annika D, Arvind R, Sayali R (2012) Decolorization of textile dyes and biological stains by bacterial strains isolated from industrial effluents. Adv Appl Sci Res 3: 2660-2671.
    [131] Mahmood R, Shariff R, Ali S, et al. (2013). Bioremediation of textile effluents by indigenous bacterial consortia and its effects on zea mays L.CVC 1415. J Anim Plant Sci 23:1193-1199.
    [132] Costa S, Dedola D, Pellizzari S, et al. (2017) Lignin biodegradation in pulp and paper mill wastewater by selected white rot fungi. Water 9: 935. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9120935 doi: 10.3390/w9120935
    [133] Chandra R (2001) Microbial decolorization of pulp and paper mill effluent in presence of nitrogen and phosphorus by activated sludge process. J Environ Biol 22: 23.
    [134] Maghsoodi V, Samadi A, Ghobadi Z (2007) Biodegradation of effluents from dairy plat by bacterial Isolates. Iran J Chem Chem Eng 26: 55-59.
    [135] Sangitha P, Aruna U, Maggirwar R (2012) Biodegradation of tannery effluent by using tannery effluent isolates. Int Multidiscip Res J 2: 43-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.33765/thate.10.3.2 doi: 10.33765/thate.10.3.2
    [136] Krishnaveni R, Pramiladevi Y, Rao S (2013) Bioremediation of steel industrial effluents using soil microorganisms. Int J Adv Biotechnol Res 4: 51-56.
    [137] Buvaneswari S, Muthukumaran M, Damodarkumar S, et al. (2013) Isolation and identification of predominant bacteria to evaluate the bioremediation in sugar mill effluent. Int J Curr Sci 5: 123-132.
    [138] Kedia R, Sharma A (2015) Bioremediation of industrial effluents using Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Biosci Biotechnol Res Asia 12: 197-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1651 doi: 10.13005/bbra/1651
    [139] Von Canstein H, Li Y, Timmis K, et al. (1999) Removal of mercury from Chloralkali electrolysis wastewater by a mercury resistant Pseudomonal putida strain. Appl Environ, Microbiol 65: 5279-5284. https://doi.org/10.1128%2Faem.65.12.5279-5284.1999 doi: 10.1128/AEM.65.12.5279-5284.1999
    [140] Spina F, Varese G (2016) Fungal bioremediation of emerging micropollutants in municipal wastewaters. Fungal Biol 4: 115-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42852-9_6 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-42852-9_6
    [141] Hesnawi R, Dahmani K, Al-Swayah A, et al. (2014) Biodegradation of municipal wastewater with local and commercial bacteria. Procedia Eng 70: 810-814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.02.088 doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.02.088
    [142] Nzila A, Razzak S, Zhu J (2016) Bioaugmentation: an emerging strategy of industrial wastewater treatment for reuse and discharge. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13: 846. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fijerph13090846 doi: 10.3390/ijerph13090846
    [143] Qu Y, Zhang R, Ma F, et al. (2011) Bioaugmentation with a novel alkali-tolerant Pseudomonas strain for alkaline phenol wastewater treatment in sequencing batch reactor. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 27: 1919-1926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-011-0653-2 doi: 10.1007/s11274-011-0653-2
    [144] Chen Y, Lin L, Jones G, et al. (2009) Enhancing biodegradation of wastewater by microbial with fractional factorial design. J Hazard Mater 171: 948-953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.06.100 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.06.100
    [145] Mongkolthanaruk W, Saovanee D (2002) Biodegradation of lipid-rich wastewater by a mixed bacteria consortium. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 50: 101-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0964-8305(02)00057-4 doi: 10.1016/S0964-8305(02)00057-4
    [146] Mizuno H, Hirai H, Kawai S, et al. (2009) Removal of estrogenic activity of iso-butylparaben and n-butylparaben by laccase in the presence of 1-hydroxybenzotriazole. Biodegradation 20: 533-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-008-9242-y doi: 10.1007/s10532-008-9242-y
    [147] Haroune L, Saibi S, Bellenger J, et al. (2014) Evaluation of the efficiency of Trametes hirsuta for the removal of multiple pharmaceutical compounds under low concentrations relevant to the environment. Bioresour Technol 171: 199-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.036 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.036
    [148] Sabuda M, Rosenfeld C, DeJournett T, et al. (2020) Fungal bioremediation of selenium-contaminated industrial and municipal wastewaters. Front Microbiol 11: 2105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.02105 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.02105
    [149] Nag C, Toppo K, Nayaka S, et al. (2019) Bioremediation of municipal sewage using potential microalgae. In Application of Microalgae in Wastewater Treatment 2019: 121-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13913-1_7
    [150] Abdel-Raouf N, Al-Homaidan A, Ibraheem I (2012) Microalgae and wastewater treatment. Saudi J Biol Sci 3: 257-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2012.04.005 doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2012.04.005
    [151] Ansari A, Khoja A, Nawar A, et al. (2017) Wastewater treatment by local microalgae strains for CO2 sequestration and biofuel production. Appl Water Sci 7: 4151-4158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-017-0574-9 doi: 10.1007/s13201-017-0574-9
    [152] Shi J, Podola B, Melkonian M (2007) Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from wastewater using microalgae immobilized on twin layers: an experimental study. J Appl Phycol 19: 417-423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10811-006-9148-1 doi: 10.1007/s10811-006-9148-1
    [153] Saxena A, Gupta V, Saxena S (2020) Bioremediation: a green approach towards the treatment of sewage waste. J Phytol Res 33: 171-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-018-00036-y doi: 10.1007/s42398-018-00036-y
    [154] Izadi A, Hosseinia M, Darzia G, et al. (2019) Performance of an integrated fixed bed membrane bioreactor applied to pollutant removal from paper recycling wastewater. Water Resour Ind 21: 100-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2019.100111 doi: 10.1016/j.wri.2019.100111
    [155] Azubuike C. Chikere B, Okpokwasili C (2016) Bioremediation techniques-classification based on site of application: principles, advantages, limitations and prospects. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 32: 180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-016-2137-x doi: 10.1007/s11274-016-2137-x
    [156] Crini G, Lichtfouse E (2019) Advantages and disadvantages of techniques used for wastewater treatment. Environ Chem Lett 17: 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-018-0785-9 doi: 10.1007/s10311-018-0785-9
    [157] Borchert E, Hammerschmidt K, Hentschel U, et al. (2021) Enhancing microbial pollutant degradation by integrating eco-evolutionary principles with environmental biotechnology. Trends Microbiol 29: 908-918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2021.03.002 doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2021.03.002
    [158] Zhou Y, Kumar M, Sarsaiya S, et al. (2022) Challenges and opportunities in bioremediation of micro-nano plastics: a review. Sci Total Environ 802: 149823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149823 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149823
    [159] Kumar M, Xiong X, He M, et al. (2020) Micro-plastics as pollutants in agricultural soils. Environ Pollut 265: 114980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114980 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114980
    [160] Abdulyekeen K, Muhammad M, Giwa S, et al. (2016) Bioremediation of used motor oil contaminated soil using elephant and horse dung stimulants. IOSR J Environ Sci Toxicol Food Technol 10: 73-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.9790/2402-1012027378 doi: 10.9790/2402-1009017382
    [161] Yoshida S, Hiraga K, Takehana T, et al. (2016) A bacterium that degrades and assimilated polyethylene terephthalate. Science 351: 1196-1199. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad6359 doi: 10.1126/science.aad6359
    [162] Danso D, Chow J, Streit W (2019) Plastics: environmental and biotechnological perspectives on microbial degradation. Appl Environ Microbiol 85: e01095-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01095-19 doi: 10.1128/AEM.01095-19
    [163] Son H, Cho I, Joo S, Seo H, et al. (2019) Rational protein engineering of thermo-stable PETase from Ideonella sakaiensis for highly effective PET degradation. ACS Catal 9: 3519-3526. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.9b00568 doi: 10.1021/acscatal.9b00568
    [164] Zhang X, Dengm H, Liu N, et al. (2019) Molecular modification of a halohydrin dehalogenase for kinetic regulation to synthesize optically pure (S)-epichlorohydrin. Bioresour Technol 276: 154-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.12.103 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.12.103
    [165] Rizwan M, Singh M, Mitra C, et al. (2014) Ecofriendly application of nanomaterials: nanobioremediation. J Nanopart 2014: 431787. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/431787 doi: 10.1155/2014/431787
    [166] Mandeep S, Shukla P (2020) Microbial nanotechnology for bioremediation of industrial wastewater. Front Microbiol 11: 590631. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.590631 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.590631
    [167] Wang X, Wang Q, Wang S, et al. (2012) Effect of biostimulation on community level physiological profiles of microorganisms in field-scale biopiles composed of aged oil sludge. Bioresour Technol 111: 308-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.158 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.158
    [168] Bhattacharya A, Gupta A (2013) Evaluation of Acinetobacter sp. B9 for Cr (Ⅵ) resistance and detoxification with potential application in bioremediation of heavy-metals-rich industrial wastewater. ESPR 20: 6628-6637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-1728-4 doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-1728-4
    [169] Cassidy D, Srivastava V, Dombrowski F, et al. (2015) Combining in situ chemical oxidation, stabilization, and anaerobic bioremediation in a single application to reduce contaminant mass and leachability in soil. J Hazard Mater 297: 347-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.05.030 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.05.030
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Sangwook Kim, Hsiao-Ying Shadow Huang, Mechanical stresses at the cathode–electrolyte interface in lithium-ion batteries, 2016, 31, 0884-2914, 3506, 10.1557/jmr.2016.373
    2. Susmita Sarkar, Rajankumar L. Patel, Xinhua Liang, Jonghyun Park, Unveiling the Role of CeO2 Atomic Layer Deposition Coatings on LiMn2O4 Cathode Materials: An Experimental and Theoretical Study, 2017, 9, 1944-8244, 30599, 10.1021/acsami.7b06988
    3. S. Esmizadeh, H. Haftbaradaran, F. Mossaiby, An investigation of the critical conditions leading to deintercalation induced fracture in two-phase elastic electrode particles using a moving interphase core-shell model, 2019, 74, 09977538, 96, 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2018.10.019
    4. H. Haftbaradaran, A. Maddahian, F. Mossaiby, A fracture mechanics study of the phase separating planar electrodes: Phase field modeling and analytical results, 2017, 350, 03787753, 127, 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.03.073
    5. Netanel Shpigel, Mikhael D. Levi, Xiaopeng Cheng, Tianci Cao, Rui Wu, Tyler S. Mathis, Yuefei Zhang, Doron Aurbach, Yury Gogotsi, Diffusion-Induced Transient Stresses in Li-Battery Electrodes Imaged by Electrochemical Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation Monitoring and Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy, 2019, 4, 2380-8195, 1907, 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b00884
    6. Nan Luo, Yong Lin, Jian Guo, Emanuele Quattrocchi, Huaijiu Deng, Jian Dong, Francesco Ciucci, Filippo Boi, Chunfeng Hu, Salvatore Grasso, Spark Plasma Sintering of LiFePO4: AC Field Suppressing Lithium Migration, 2021, 14, 1996-1944, 2826, 10.3390/ma14112826
    7. D Clerici, F Mocera, F Pistorio, Analysis of fracture behaviour in active materials for lithium ion batteries, 2022, 1214, 1757-8981, 012018, 10.1088/1757-899X/1214/1/012018
    8. M. Nikpour, B. A. Mazzeo, D. R. Wheeler, A Model for Investigating Sources of Li-Ion Battery Electrode Heterogeneity: Part II. Active Material Size, Shape, Orientation, and Stiffness, 2021, 168, 0013-4651, 120518, 10.1149/1945-7111/ac3c1f
    9. Iheke Micheal Nwachukwu, Assumpta Chinwe Nwanya, A.B.C. Ekwealor, Fabian I. Ezema, Recent progress in Mn and Fe-rich cathode materials used in Li-ion batteries, 2022, 54, 2352152X, 105248, 10.1016/j.est.2022.105248
    10. Chihyun Nam, Bonho Koo, Juwon Kim, Jinkyu Chung, Jaejung Song, Danwon Lee, Sungjae Seo, Munsoo Song, Seyeon Shin, Namdong Kim, Markus Weigand, Jian Wang, Jongwoo Lim, Dynamic Lithium Transport Pathway via Crack Formation in Phase-Separating Battery Particles, 2025, 1936-0851, 10.1021/acsnano.4c15960
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5306) PDF downloads(543) Cited by(0)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(1)  /  Tables(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog