energies

Article
The Influence of the Duration of Exposure to Direct Current on
the Treatment Efficiency of Wastewater from Soilless Tomato
Cultivation in a Bio-Electrochemical Reactor
Artur Mielcarek 1 , Kamil Łukasz Bryszewski 1 , Joanna Rodziewicz 1, * , Marian Kwietniewski 2 ,
Wojciech Janczukowicz 1 , Karolina Kłobukowska 1 and Joanna Struk-Sokołowska 3

1 Faculty of Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Warszawska St. 117a,
10-719 Olsztyn, Poland; artur.mielcarek@uwm.edu.pl (A.M.); kamil.bryszewski@uwm.edu.pl (K.Ł.B.);
jawoj@uwm.edu.pl (W.J.); karolina.klobukowska@student.uwm.edu.pl (K.K.)
2 Faculty of Building Services, Hydro and Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology,
00-653 Warsaw, Poland; marian.kwietniewski@is.pw.edu.pl
3 Faculty of Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences, Białystok University of Technology, Wiejska 45A,
15-351 Białystok, Poland; j.struk@pb.edu.pl
* Correspondence: joanna.rodziewicz@uwm.edu.pl; Tel.: +48-89-524-5609

Citation: Mielcarek, A.; Bryszewski,
K.Ł.; Rodziewicz, J.; Kwietniewski,
M.; Janczukowicz, W.; Kłobukowska,
K.; Struk-Sokołowska, J. The
Influence of the Duration of Exposure
to Direct Current on the Treatment
Efficiency of Wastewater from
Soilless Tomato Cultivation in a
Bio-Electrochemical Reactor. Energies
2023, 16, 7767. https://doi.org/
10.3390/en16237767
Abstract: The management of wastewater from soilless tomato cultivation poses a technological and
economic challenge. Given the above, the aim of this study was to determine the treatment efficiency
of wastewater from soilless tomato cultivation in a bio-electrochemical reactor under conditions of
direct electric current flow. The treatment efficiency was tested in three time variants of wastewater
exposure to the electric current: V1—24 h exposure phase; V2—12 h exposure phase/12 h no exposure
phase; and V3—12 h no exposure phase/12 h exposure phase. Experiments were conducted with
two organic substrates, sodium acetate and acetic acid, at the C/N ratio of 1.25, with a direct current
intensity of 1.25 A·m−2 and hydraulic retention time of 24 h. The study results show the feasibility
of achieving a satisfactory technological effect in a bio-electrochemical reactor without the need
for electric current flow throughout the 24 h treatment cycle. From the energy consumption and
technological standpoints, the most viable approach, ensuring 90.4 ± 1.6% and 94.9 ± 0.7% efficiencies
of nitrogen and phosphorus removal, respectively, turned out to be feeding the reactor with sodium
acetate and wastewater exposure to the electric current flow only during the first 12 h of the treatment
cycle. The scope of the conducted research justifies its continuation in order to determine the optimal
time for supplying electricity to the bio-electrochemical reactor and the impact of the C/N value on
the nitrogen and COD effluent concentrations.
Keywords: bio-electrochemical reactor; duration of direct current flow; soilless tomato cultivation;
wastewater treatment; nutrients and organic carbon removal

Academic Editor: Jun Li

Received: 30 October 2023

Revised: 17 November 2023
Accepted: 23 November 2023
Published: 25 November 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
1. Introduction
Due to the specific composition of drainage water from the soilless cultivation of
crops, including tomatoes, that have high concentrations of nitrates and phosphorus and
a low concentration of organic compounds [1], its treatment by means of conventional
biological methods based on activated sludge is extremely difficult [2]. For this reason,
alternative treatment methods are sought, like bio-treatment aided with an external organic
substrate [3,4], using microalgae [5] and wetlands [6], and deploying hydrogenotrophic
denitrification aided by direct electric current [7] or alternating electric current [8]. Owing
to the combination of biological and electrochemical processes and the supply of carbon
from various sources, it is feasible to provide appropriate conditions for hydrogenotrophic
denitrification, heterotrophic and electrochemical nitrate reduction, and the electrocoagula-
tion of phosphorus in one reactor. This has also been confirmed in a study by Rodziewicz
et al. [7], who showed that the use of an electrobiological disc contactor enabled the removal

Energies 2023, 16, 7767. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16237767 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2023, 16, 7767 2 of 14

of 99.8% of phosphorus and 53.4% of nitrogen from synthetic greenhouse wastewater. In

the cited study, sodium acetate served as the external source of carbon and the electric
current density used was 10.0 A·m−2 , whereas the hydraulic wastewater retention time
(HRT) was 24 h. A not very high reduction in nitrogen concentration was achieved in
the aerobic reactor, namely a bio-electrochemical disc contactor, which showed that there
is a need to search for a technological solution that would ensure better control of aero-
bic conditions. Such a reactor can be a Sequential Batch Biofilm Reactor (SBBR) with a
biological membrane.
In the study by Bryszewski et al. [9], in view of the conclusions drawn from the work of
Rodziewicz et al. [7], the SBBR was used to treat drainage from soilless tomato cultivation,
with sodium acetate as the external carbon source. Depending on the aerobic conditions
applied in the reactor, the efficiency of the removal of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and
organic compounds expressed by chemical oxygen demand (COD) reached 81% (anoxic
reactor), 91% (aerobic reactor), and 63% (anoxic-aerobic reactor), respectively. In the
experimental variant with HRT = 24 h, the electric current flew between the reactor’s
electrodes throughout the entire treatment cycle.
In the reactors with the current flow, nitrogen removal proceeded via three processes,
i.e., the commonly known and implemented heterotrophic denitrification, autotrophic
denitrification (in this case, hydrogenotrophic denitrification), and electrochemical nitrate
reduction. The efficiency of hydrogenotrophic denitrification, which takes place upon the
activity of hydrogenotrophs that use gaseous hydrogen (electron donor) produced during
water electrolysis on the cathode or anode, results from the current flow [10,11].
The course of hydrogenotrophic denitrification depends on such factors as pH, temper-
ature, HRT, and amounts of inorganic carbon and dissolved hydrogen. Its efficiency is also
largely determined by the electric current density. The literature describes investigations
addressing the removal of nitrogen in bio-electrical reactors conducted in a broad range
of electric current densities. Safari et al. [12] tested densities ranging from 2 mA·cm−2 to
32 mA·cm−2 , and found that nitrogen was most efficiently removed at 8 mA·cm−2 . Accord-
ing to Park et al. [13], the highest rate of nitrate reduction in a bio-electrical reactor, reaching
0.17 mg N-NO3 ·cm−2 ·d−1 , was achieved under the flow of electric current with a density
of 19 A·m−2 . In turn, Tong et al. [14] applied current densities of 0–1.6 A·m−2 and achieved
the highest nitrate removal rate at 400 mA·m−2 . Investigations conducted by Kłodowska
et al. [15] demonstrated a high total nitrogen removal efficiency, reaching 85%, at a current
density of 210 mA·m−2 . Unfortunately, too-high current density affected the population of
microorganisms in the reactor [16]. In the study conducted by Wei et al. [17], the number of
live bacteria decreased by 10%, 15%, and 29% at current densities of 6.7 A·m−2 , 12.3 A·m−2 ,
and 24.7 A·m−2 , respectively, with reactors operating at a continuous current flow.
The flow of electric current through the electrodes contributes not only to the course of
nitrate reduction but also to the electrocoagulation process [18]. Ghazouani et al. [19] treated
synthetic sewage using an electric current with densities from 1 mA·cm−2 to 40 mA·cm−2 .
The initial nitrate nitrogen concentration was 350 mg N·L−1 and the phosphate concentra-
tion was 50 mg P·L−1 . The efficiencies of removing nitrogen and phosphorus compounds
in the studied range of current densities were 37–99% and 51–99%, respectively. Despite
the high nitrate nitrogen removal efficiency, the process produced ammonium ion, which
at the highest current density tested accounted for about 90% of total nitrogen. Electric
current density is also a factor that can directly affect the efficiency of electrocoagulation,
as it allows the amount of coagulant that enters the solution to be controlled. The equiv-
alent mass of aluminum and iron resulting from anode dissolution is 335.6 mg·A−1 ·h−1
and 1.014 mg·A−1 ·h−1 , respectively. It should be noted that the current density directly
affects the pH and temperature of the process [20]. The range of densities applied is broad.
Depending on the source, the density of the current applied in phosphorus removal has
been reported to range from 1 A·m−2 to 50 A·m−2 [21]. Omwene et al. [22] managed to
remove 99% of phosphorus from household sewage upon the use of an electric current with
densities ranging from 10 to 40 A·m−2 . However, the time needed to achieve such a high
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 3 of 14

efficiency varied and was 100 min for the current density of 10 A·m−2 and 50 min for the
current density of 40 A·m−2 . This is due to the fact that the amount of coagulant produced
depends not only on the current density but also on the duration of the current flow.
In periodic bio-electrochemical reactors, a whole series of processes takes place within
one treatment cycle, both in parallel and in series. The course and efficiency of many of them
depends on the presence of intermediate or final products of processes which commenced at
the beginning of the cycle. Most of these processes are affected by the current flow between
the electrodes [23]. The literature presents data on the operation of bio-electrochemical
reactors, in which the current is supplied during the entire cycle [9,12–17]. However, there
are no reports on the effect of the length of the current flow phase, which is a fraction of the
cycle duration and phase sequence in the cycle (phase with current flow, phase without
current flow), on the removal efficiency of biogenic and organic compounds.
Given the above, the aim of this study was to determine the treatment efficiency
of wastewater from soilless tomato cultivation in a bio-electrochemical reactor under
conditions of direct electric current flow, including effects of flow phase duration and flow
phase sequence. The scope of the research included determining the efficiency of removing
nitrogen, phosphorus and organic compounds in the bio-electrochemical reactor depending
on the duration and mode of reactor supply with electric current and on the type of external
carbon source used.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Reactors
Six sequencing batch biofilm reactors (SBBR) were used for the treatment of wastewater
from soilless tomato cultivation. A single SBBR had an anode made of iron and a cathode
made of stainless-steel discs mounted on a rotating vertical shaft. The electrodes were
connected to a direct current power supply (Rohde & Schwarz HMP 4040, Munich, Germany).
The technological parameters of the reactor were as follows: number of discs—5; diameter
of a single disc—12 cm; disc thickness—1 mm; distance between discs—1.5 cm; total disc
surface area—0.113 m2 ; active volume of the reactor—2 L; number of disc revolutions—
14 rpm; and immersion of discs—100%. The construction of the reactor allowed for the
exchange of the entire volume of the treated wastewater. Iron anodes were used in the
study because they are less susceptible to digestion and, as a result, allow less sludge to
be generated than aluminum electrodes [24]. Activated sludge from the denitrification
chamber of the Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant “Łyna” in Olsztyn was used as the
inoculum. The adaptation period lasted 3 months, after which the appropriate tests began.
During the adaptation period, the same reactor operating parameters were used as during
the actual tests.

2.2. Organization of Experiments

The experiment aimed to determine the influence of direct electric current flow on the
efficiency of wastewater treatment in a bio-electrochemical reactor in three time variants of
wastewater exposure to the electric current: V1—24 h exposure phase; V2—12 h exposure
phase/12 h no exposure phase; and V3—12 h no exposure phase/12 h exposure phase.
The electric current density chosen based on the results of previous studies was
1.25 A·m2 . At this density, the dephosphatation efficiency exceeded 92% and, at the same
time, the specific energy consumption per unit load of removed biogenic compounds was
significantly lower than at densities of 2.5 and 5.0 A·m2 [23].
Two types of organic substrate were fed into the reactors, i.e., sodium acetate in
reactors R1–R3 and acetic acid in reactors R4–R6 (Figure 1). The literature indicates the
technological advantages of these types of external carbon sources [8,23]. A carbon dose
of C/N = 1.5 was applied in the experiments, with 100% of the organic substrate dose
delivered at the beginning of the cycle, which according to previous studies guarantees a
very high removal efficiency of both nitrogen and phosphorus compounds and at the same
time does not cause high concentrations of organic compounds in the effluent [8].
 Two types of organic substrate were fed into the reactors, i.e., sodium acetate in reac-
tors R1–R3 and acetic acid in reactors R4–R6 (Figure 1). The literature indicates the tech-
nological advantages of these types of external carbon sources [8,23]. A carbon dose of
C/N = 1.5 was applied in the experiments, with 100% of the organic substrate dose deliv-
ered at the beginning of the cycle, which according to previous studies guarantees a very
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 4 of 14
high removal efficiency of both nitrogen and phosphorus compounds and at the same
time does not cause high concentrations of organic compounds in the effluent [8].

Figure 1. Study design.

Figure 1. Study design.

It was
It was assumed
assumed that
that the
the concentrations
concentrations of
of contaminants
contaminants would
would vary
vary in
in the
the effluent
effluent
depending on which phase of the treatment cycle was being conducted with direct electric
depending on which phase of the treatment cycle was being conducted with direct electric
current flow.
current flow.

2.3. Drainage Water

Experiments were wereconducted
conductedwith withreal real horticultural
horticultural drainage
drainage fromfrom a greenhouse
a greenhouse (sur-
(surface
face areaarea of approximately
of approximately 200,000 m2 ), m
200,000 2), wherein
wherein tomatoes
tomatoes are grown
are grown on a substratum
on a substratum from
mineral wool wool
from mineral [1]. The [1].physicochemical
The physicochemical indicators of theofdrainage
indicators the drainage water werewere
water as follows:
as fol-
total ± 3.1 −1 ; total−1nitrogen (TN) 536.9 ± 10.7 mg N·L−1 ;
C·Lmg
lows:organic carboncarbon
total organic (TOC) 15.6
(TOC) 15.6mg ± 3.1 C·L ; total nitrogen (TN) 536.9 ± 10.7 mg
nitrates
N·L−1; nitrates ± 7.40± mg
535.71535.71 7.40Nmg·L−N·L
1 ; nitrites 0.090
−1; nitrites ± 0.010
0.090 ± 0.010mg mgNN·L ·L−1−1;; ammonia
ammonia nitrogen
1.1 ± 0.2 mg N · L − 1 ; total phosphorus (TP) 103.8 ± 5.3 mg P · L − 1 ; pH 6.21; and electrolytic
± N·L ; total phosphorus
−1 ± 5.3 P·L ; pH 6.21; and
−1

conductivity (EC) 6.213 ± 0.202 mS · cm −1 .

± 0.202 mS·cm . −1

Table 1 shows the TOC, pH, and EC values in the effluent effluent after organic substrate
addition.

Table 1. The pH value, electrolytic conductivity, and total organic carbon concentration after organic
substrate addition to the wastewater.

Values
R1–R3 R4–R6
(Sodium Acetate) (Acetic Acid)
TOC [mg C·L−1 ] 804.3 ± 7.9 806.2 ± 26.5
pH 7.13 3.88
EC [mS·cm−1 ] 7.421 ± 0.229 6.101 ± 0.247

2.4. Analytical Methods

The following physicochemical analyses were conducted for the wastewater inflow to
the reactors and for the treated effluent: total organic carbon (TOC) concentration using the
TOC-L CPH/TNM-L analyzer (Shimadzu Corporation, Kioto, Japan) with the method of
 pH 7.13 3.88
EC [mS·cm−1] 7.421 ± 0.229 6.101 ± 0.247

2.4. Analytical Methods

The following physicochemical analyses were conducted for the wastewater inflow
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 5 of 14
to the reactors and for the treated effluent: total organic carbon (TOC) concentration using
the TOC-L CPH/TNM-L analyzer (Shimadzu Corporation, Kioto, Japan) with the method
of “oxidative combustion with infrared analysis”; total nitrogen concentration using the
“oxidative
TOC-L combustion
CPH/TNM-L with infrared
analyzer analysis”;
(Shimadzu total nitrogen
Corporation, concentration
Japan) using the TOC-L
with the “oxidizing com-
bustion–chemiluminescence” method; ammonia nitrogen concentration withcombustion–
CPH/TNM-L analyzer (Shimadzu Corporation, Japan) with the “oxidizing the HACH
chemiluminescence”
Lange method; nitrite
LCK 303–304 method; ammonia nitrogen concentration
concentration with the
with the HACH HACH
Lange LCKLange LCK
341–342
303–304 method; nitrite concentration with the HACH Lange LCK 341–342
method; nitrate concentration with the HACH Lange LCK 339–340 method; total phos- method; nitrate
concentration
phorus with thewith
concentration HACH theLange
HACH LCK 339–340
Lange LCKmethod;
348–350total phosphorus
method; concentration
iron concentration
with the HACH Lange LCK 348–350 method; iron concentration with the HACH
with the HACH Lange LCK 321 and LCK 521 methods; pH value, electrolytic conductivity Lange
LCK 321 and LCK 521 methods; pH value, electrolytic conductivity and temperature using
and temperature using the HQ 4300 multi-parameter meter (Hach, Germany).
the HQ 4300 multi-parameter meter (Hach, Germany).
Statistical analysis of the results obtained was performed using the STATISTICA 13.3
Statistical analysis of the results obtained was performed using the STATISTICA
PL software, at a significance level of α = 0.05.
13.3 PL software, at a significance level of α = 0.05.
3.3.Results
Resultsand
andDiscussion
Discussion
3.1.
3.1.pH,
pH,EC,
EC,and
andIron
IronContent
Content
The
The pH value ofthe
pH value of theeffluent
effluentafter
afterorganic
organicsubstrate
substrateaddition
additionwas was7.13
7.13and
and3.88
3.88ininthe
the
experimental
experimental variants, with sodium
variants, with sodiumacetate
acetateandand acetic
acetic acid,
acid, respectively,
respectively, usedused as sub-
as substrates
strates
(Figure(Figure 2). In
2). In the the sodium
sodium acetateacetate variant,
variant, the effluent
the effluent pH ranged
pH ranged fromfrom
8.00 8.00
in R1into
R18.60
to
8.60 in R2,
in R2, whereas
whereas in the
in the acetic
acetic acidacid variant
variant thethe lowest
lowest pH pH reached
reached 3.65
3.65 (R4)and
(R4) andthe
thehighest
high-
est
oneone reached
reached 7.167.16
(R5).(R5). A high
A high pH pHvaluevalue (6.89)
(6.89) waswas
also also
notednoted inR6
in the thereactor
R6 reactor with
with acetic
acetic acid
acid fed asfed
the as the substrate.
substrate. The increase
The increase in pH measured
in pH values values measured in the was
in the reactors reactors
due towasan
due to an in
increase increase in alkalinity
alkalinity caused by caused by denitrification.
denitrification. In the
In the case case of bio-electrochemical
of bio-electrochemical reactors
reactors
fed withfed with
acetic acetic
acid, the acid, the consumption
consumption of thisby
of this substrate substrate by microorganisms
microorganisms was
was also of great
importance.
also The final pHThe
of great importance. of the treated
final pH ofwastewater
the treated was also affected
wastewater by the
was also formation
affected by theof
H+ ions upon
formation of Hwater electrolysis
+ ions upon water and the resultant
electrolysis pHresultant
and the decreasepH [25]. Therefore,
decrease [25].there was no
Therefore,
pH increase
there was no in
pHR4 despiteindenitrification
increase (low efficiency
R4 despite denitrification of the
(low acid substrate
efficiency consumption
of the acid substrate
and H+ ion production
consumption and H+ ionthroughout
productionthe cycle). the cycle).
throughout

Figure
Figure2.2.pH
pHvalue
value(A)
(A)and
andelectrolytic
electrolyticconductivity
conductivity(B)
(B)ofofthe
theeffluent.
effluent.

Theelectrolytic
The electrolyticconductivity
conductivity of of
thethe wastewater
wastewater fed fed
to theto reactor
the reactor ± 0.202±
was 6.213
was 6.213
0.202 mS
mS·cm ·cm−1 , whereas
−1, whereas after organic
after organic substrate
substrate addition addition it reached
it reached 0.247±mS·cm
6.101 ±6.101 0.247 mS ·cm
−1 in −1
the
− 1
in theacid
acetic acetic acid variant
variant and 7.421 0.229±mS·cm
and±7.421 0.229 −1
mS in·cm in the sodium
the sodium acetate variant.
acetate variant. The ECThe EC
of the
of the effluent treated in the sodium acetate variant ranged from 5.539 ± 0.093 mS·cm−1
to 5.717 ± 0.098 mS·cm−1 (Figure 2B). In the acetic acid variant, the highest EC value was
recorded in R5, where it reached 5.196 ± 0.515 mS·cm−1 . The reactors with 24 h current flow
and those with 12 h current flow in the second phase of the treatment cycle had similar elec-
trolytic conductivity, reaching 4.631 ± 0.451 mS·cm−1 (in R4) and 4.592 ± 0.343 mS·cm−1
(in R6), respectively. The EC in the sodium acetate variant was higher compared to the
variants with acetic acid used as the substrate. This was due to EC values of the solutions
used as carbon sources (30.900 mS·cm−1 sodium acetate solution; 1.106 mS·cm−1 acetic acid
solution). The presented results show that, despite providing an additional load of organic
compounds, the effluent had a lower EC value compared to the influent. The decrease in
electrolytic conductivity is due to the consumption of organic substrate and the removal of
some of the anions and cations present in wastewater [7,8,26], as well as dilution caused by
the introduction of organic substrate (R4–R6).
The total iron concentration in the influent was 0.080 ± 0.010 mg Fe·L−1 and did
not increase in the effluent after the electrochemical dissolution of electrodes only in R3,
 presented results show that, despite providing an additional load of organic compounds,
the effluent had a lower EC value compared to the influent. The decrease in electrolytic
conductivity is due to the consumption of organic substrate and the removal of some of
the anions and cations present in wastewater [7,8,26], as well as dilution caused by the
introduction of organic substrate (R4–R6).
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 6 of 14
The total iron concentration in the influent was 0.080 ± 0.010 mg Fe·L−1 and did not
increase in the effluent after the electrochemical dissolution of electrodes only in R3,
where it reached 0.058 ± 0.010 mg Fe·L−1 (Figure 3). In the sodium acetate variant, the high-
where
est totalitiron
reached 0.058 ± 0.010
concentration was mg Fe·L−1in(Figure
recorded R1 with 3).a In
24the sodium
h flow acetatecurrent,
of electric variant,i.e.,
the
highest total iron concentration
0.210 ± 0.130 mg Fe·L .−Similarly,
−1 wasin the acetic acid variant, the highest concentration i.e.,
recorded in R1 with a 24 h flow of electric current, of
0.210 ± 0.130 mg Fe · L 1 . Similarly, in the acetic acid variant, the highest concentration
total iron, reaching 0.860 ± 0.370 mg Fe·L−1, was−determined in R4 with 24 h electric current
of total iron, reaching 0.860 ± 0.370 mg Fe·L 1 , was determined in R4 with 24 h electric
exposure. The lowest concentration of total iron in the acetic acid variant was recorded in
current exposure. The lowest concentration of total iron in the acetic acid variant was
reactor R6 (0.170 ± 0.080 mg Fe·L−1).
recorded in reactor R6 (0.170 ± 0.080 mg Fe·L−1 ).

Figure
Figure3.3.Concentration
Concentrationof
oftotal
totaliron
ironin
inthe
theeffluent.
effluent.

Theincrease
The increasein inthe
thetotal
totaliron
ironconcentration
concentrationin inthe
the treated
treated wastewater
wastewaterwas wasduedueto
tothe
the
iron anode dissolution. The increase in wastewater contamination
iron anode dissolution. The increase in wastewater contamination with iron observed in with iron observed in
the present study was, however, small compared to the literature data.
the present study was, however, small compared to the literature data. Tejera et al. [27], Tejera et al. [27],
who treated
treatedleachate
leachatefromfromaamunicipal
municipallandfill
landfillatatcurrent
currentdensities
densities 5 mA·cm −2
who ofof5 mA·cm −2 andand
10
10 mA−2 ·cm − 2 , determined L−1 200
−1 ·and
mA·cm , determined iron iron concentration
concentration in thein treated
the treated effluent
effluent at 100
at 100 mg·L mg and
200 mg
mg·L ·L−1 , respectively.
−1, respectively. In turn,In turn, Krystynik
Krystynik et al. [28]etremoved
al. [28] removed
chromiumchromium
and nickelandionsnickel
dur-
ions during the treatment of groundwater from a metallurgical
ing the treatment of groundwater from a metallurgical plant and found a residual plant and found a residual
iron
−1 at a current density of
iron concentration
concentration in theineffluent
the effluent between
between 0.2 and0.22.2
and mg2.2Fe·L
mg−1Feat·La current density of 11.42
−2 . In their study, they used a flow-through electrocoagulation cell with a flow
11.42 mA
mA·cm −2. ·In
cmtheir study, they used a flow-through electrocoagulation cell with a flow rate
−1 .
rate
of 350ofL·h
350 −1.L·h

3.2. Removal of Organic Compounds

3.2. Removal of Organic Compounds
Experiments were conducted with an organic carbon dose of C/N 1.5, 100% of which
Experiments were conducted with an organic carbon dose of C/N 1.5, 100% of which
was fed to the reactors at the beginning of the treatment cycle. This mode of organic carbon
was fed to the reactors at the beginning of the treatment cycle. This mode of organic car-
feeding caused the concentration of organic compounds (Table 1) to increase to mean values
bon feeding caused the−concentration of organic compounds (Table 1) to increase to mean
of 804.3 ± 7.9 mg C·L 1 (R1–R3) and 806.2 ± 26.5 mg C·L−1 (R4–R6).
valuesThe
of 804.3 ± 7.9 mg C·L −1 (R1–R3) and 806.2 ± 26.5 mg C·L−1 (R4–R6).
efficiency of sodium acetate consumption (Figure 4) was at a very similar level
in all variants of electric current flow and ranged from 96.7 ± 0.6% (R1) to 97.3 ± 1.0%
(R3). The efficiency of acetic acid consumption was significantly lower and amounted
to 65.6 ± 1.0% under a 24 h flow of electric current. In the case of a 12 h current flow,
the efficiency of organic substrate consumption in R5 and R6 was similar and reached
80.4 ± 2.3% and 82.5 ± 1.8%, respectively. The concentration of organic compounds in the
effluent corresponding to the above efficiencies ranged from 21.7 ± 8.2 mg C·L−1 (R3) to
26.3 ± 4.9 mg C·L−1 (R1) in the sodium acetate variant and from 141.1 ± 14.7 mg C·L−1
(R6) to 277.2 ± 28.7 mg C·L−1 (R4) in the acetic acid variant. The statistical analysis did
not show any significant effect of the electric current flow on the concentration of organic
compounds in the treated wastewater in the case of sodium acetate used as the substrate
and a statistically significant effect of the electric current in the case of reactors fed with
acetic acid. Statistical differences were found between reactor R4 (current flow through the
whole treatment cycle—24 h) and reactors R5 and R6 (current flow in the first and second
phase of the cycle, respectively). The conducted study demonstrated a reduction in the
consumption of organic compounds upon the flow of electric current, when acetic acid was
used as the organic substrate. No negative effect (α = 0.05) of the electric current flow was
found in the reactors fed with sodium acetate.

Energies 2023, 16, 7767
the same time, the pH value drops due to the flow of electric current [25]. The appropriate
pH for heterotrophic and autotrophic denitrification is within the ranges of 7.5–9.5 and
6.5–8.6 [23-25], respectively. The pH of wastewater in reactor R4 was 3.65. According to
the literature data, autotrophic and heterotrophic denitrification is slowed down and even
arrested at pH levels below 6 [29]. In the bio-electrochemical reactors (R1–R6), some or-
ganic compounds may also have been oxidized via electrochemical oxidation (oxygen 7 of 14
production on the anode) and electrocoagulation [30].

Figure
Figure4.4.Efficiency ofof
Efficiency the consumption
the consumptionofoforganic
organiccompounds.
compounds.

As a result
Benhadji of the
et al. [31]electric
removed current
fromflow
73%in tothe
89% reactor fed with
of organic acetic acid,
compounds the efficiency
expressed by
of organic substrate consumption was lower because acetic acid
COD from leather industry wastewater using an iron anode and applying an electric causes a pH decrease.
cur-At
thewith
rent samea time, theofpH
density 150value
A·m−2drops
. The due to COD
initial the flow
wasof7.680
electric
mg current
O2·L−1, and [25].the
The appropriate
current flow
pH for heterotrophic and autotrophic denitrification is within
duration was 15 to 75 min. In turn, Eyvaz [32] removed 83% of organic compounds the ranges of 7.5–9.5
duringand
6.5–8.6 [23–25], respectively. The pH of wastewater in reactor R4
the electrocoagulation of brewing wastewater (at the initial COD concentration reaching was 3.65. According
to the
3.440 mgliterature data,
O2·L−1). The autotrophic
electric currentand heterotrophic
density applied was denitrification
150 A·m−2, the is slowed
process down
spanned and
15even
min,arrested
and theat pH levels
initial below pH
wastewater 6 [29].
wasIn7.the bio-electrochemical reactors (R1–R6), some
organic compounds may also have been oxidized via electrochemical oxidation (oxygen
production
3.3. Removal ofonNitrogen
the anode) and electrocoagulation [30].
Compounds
Benhadji et al. [31] removed from 73% to 89% of organic compounds expressed by
COD The mean
from concentration
leather of total nitrogen
industry wastewater using an iniron
the anode
influent andwas 536.9 ±an10.7
applying mg N·L
electric
−1.
current
The lowest removal efficiencies
A·m−2 . The (Figure
initial5)COD
determined inmgtheOexperiments
−1 with sodium
with a density of 150 was 7.680 2 ·L , and the current flow
acetate and acetic acid used as substrates and with a 24 h current
duration was 15 to 75 min. In turn, Eyvaz [32] removed 83% of organic compounds flow were 81.8 ± during
1.0%
the electrocoagulation of brewing wastewater (at the initial COD concentration reaching
3.440 mg O2 ·L−1 ). The electric current density applied was 150 A·m−2 , the process spanned
15 min, and the initial wastewater pH was 7.

3.3. Removal of Nitrogen Compounds

Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14
The mean concentration of total nitrogen in the influent was 536.9 ± 10.7 mg N·L−1 .
The lowest removal efficiencies (Figure 5) determined in the experiments with sodium
acetate and acetic acid used as substrates and with a 24 h current flow were 81.8 ± 1.0%
(R1)
(R1)and
and39.7
39.7± ±
5.5% (R4),
5.5% respectively.
(R4), Similarly
respectively. and
Similarly atat
and the same
the sametime, the
time, highest
the removal
highest removal
efficiencies
efficiencies were obtained using sodium acetate in R2 and R3, i.e., 90.4 ± 1.6% (R2)and
were obtained using sodium acetate in R2 and R3, i.e., 90.4 ± 1.6% (R2) and
89.9
89.9± ±
1.0% (R3),
1.0% respectively.
(R3), respectively.

Figure
Figure 5.5. Totalnitrogen
Total nitrogenremoval
removalefficiency.
efficiency.

The main form of nitrogen present in the influent was nitrate nitrogen, which ac-
The main form of nitrogen present in the influent was nitrate nitrogen, which ac-
counted for 99.78% of total nitrogen. The highest concentration of total nitrogen in the
counted for 99.78% of total nitrogen. The highest concentration of total nitrogen in the
effluent from the reactor fed with sodium acetate was determined in R1, where it reached
97.7 ± 5.4 mg N·L−1. In the case of effluents from R2 and R3, it was 51.8 ± 8.8 mg N·L−1 and
54.2 ± 5.2 mg N·L−1, respectively. In the case of R1, the main form of nitrogen, accounting
for 98.40%, was nitrate nitrogen. In reactors R2 and R3, nitrogen occurred mainly in the
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 8 of 14

effluent from the reactor fed with sodium acetate was determined in R1, where it reached
97.7 ± 5.4 mg N·L−1 . In the case of effluents from R2 and R3, it was 51.8 ± 8.8 mg N·L−1
and 54.2 ± 5.2 mg N·L−1 , respectively. In the case of R1, the main form of nitrogen,
accounting for 98.40%, was nitrate nitrogen. In reactors R2 and R3, nitrogen occurred
mainly in the form of nitrite nitrogen, the percentages of which were 74.28% and 86.63%,
respectively. In the acetic acid variant, the concentration of total nitrogen ranged from
206.4 ± 18.3 mg N·L−1 (R6) to 323.8 ± 29.5 mg N·L−1 (R4), and the main form of nitrogen
in the effluent was nitrate nitrogen, accounting for 68.00% in R6 to 99.94% in R4.
The statistical analysis showed a significant influence of wastewater exposure to the
electric current on the concentration of total nitrogen in the effluent from the reactors with
both sodium acetate and acetic acid used as substrates. In the case of the sodium acetate
variant, the 12 h electric current flow in R2 and R3 had no statistically significant effect
on the total nitrogen concentration in the effluent. At the same time, this parameter was
statistically significantly (α = 0.05) affected by the type of organic carbon source used.
The obtained efficiency of total nitrogen removal was mainly due to the biological pro-
cesses. At the applied C/N ratio of 1.5, heterotrophic and autotrophic denitrification turned
out to be responsible for the removal of nitrogenous compounds. A carbon/nitrogen ratio
above 0.5 increases the contribution of heterotrophic denitrification in the treatment process.
Below this value (C/N < 0.5), autotrophic processes are superior in bio-electrochemical
systems [33]. As reported by Hao et al. [34], nitrogen removal as a result of simultane-
ous heterotrophic and autotrophic denitrification is possible at C/N from 1 to 3. In this
C/N range, at a current intensity of 40 mA, the cited researchers removed from 62.2% to
98.3% of nitrates from synthetic domestic sewage with an initial nitrogen concentration of
30 mg N·L−1 .
During 24 h exposure of wastewater to the electric current, the lowest nitrogen removal
efficiencies were recorded among all determined values in the reactors fed with both acetic
acid (R4) and sodium acetate (R1). These results suggest that a 24 h flow of electric current
with a density of 1.2 A·m−2 inhibited the heterotrophic denitrification, which was the main
process responsible for nitrogen removal. This is due to the fact that during the electric
current flow, water electrolysis generates hydrogen, which is an electron donor during
hydrogenotrophic denitrification. However, its too-high concentration can be harmful to
biofilm growth and metabolism. In addition, the formation of excess amounts of hydrogen
can destroy biofilm structures [35]. According to Lin et al. [36], the high concentration of
hydrogen causes its adhesion to the surface of microorganisms, thereby negatively affecting
the transport of nitrates to the deeper layers of the biofilm. In turn, as Tong et al. [14]
claimed, the stimulation of heterotrophic bacteria with electric current has a positive
effect on the viability of microorganisms and allows the efficiency of nitrate removal to
be increased. However, the too-high current density applied, which according to these
authors was 1.6 A·m−2 , resulted in the inhibition of denitrification. In the study conducted
by Zhu et al. [37], despite applying an electric current with densities of 10.5 A·m−2 to
315.8 A·m−2 , no negative effect of hydrogen was observed in the treatment of synthetic
groundwater at C/N = 1.5 and a nitrate nitrogen content of 35 mg N·L−1 . The nitrogen
removal efficiency in the above-mentioned current density range was similar, ranging
from 92.4% (315.8 A· m−2 ) to 93.2% (10.5 A·m−2 ). The low nitrogen removal efficiency
noted in R4 may also be due to the low pH, which in this reactor was in the range of
3.04–4.58, which is well below optimal for both autotrophic (6.5–8.6) and heterotrophic
(7.5–9.5) denitrification. At the same time, the analysis of the literature data suggests that
the effectiveness of aiding nitrogen removal through the use of electric current may be
determined by the type and associated quantitative and qualitative composition of the
treated wastewater and other factors, such as the type of material the cathode and anode
are made of.
In the bio-electrochemical reactors with 12 h electric current flow in both the first and
second phases of the treatment cycle, an increase was recorded in the concentration of
nitrites (Figure 6). The literature data indicates that the reasons for nitrite accumulation
 Energies 2023, 16, 7767 9 of 14

during heterotrophic denitrification may include a high nitrate concentration, a high oxy-
gen concentration, inadequate wastewater retention time, and both low and high pH, as
well as the composition of the microbiological community [38,39]. In addition, during
autotrophic denitrification, the accumulation of nitrites is influenced by the concentration
of hydrogen [40]. Both too high and too low H2 levels increase the share of nitrites during
autotrophic denitrification. Probably, at the 12 h current flow, the amount of hydrogen
produced may have been too low to ensure efficient hydrogenotrophic denitrification. Also,
Chang et al. [41] demonstrated a significant effect of hydrogen concentration on nitrite
accumulation during hydrogenotrophic denitrification. They showed the inhibition of
nitrite reductase at a hydrogen concentration lower than 0.2 mg H2 ·L−1 , and that of nitrate
reductase at a hydrogen concentration below 0.1 mg H2 ·L−1 . In addition, according to
these authors, nitrite reductase is more sensitive to changes in hydrogen concentration,
thus causing the accumulation of nitrites. The optimal hydrogen concentration for effective
hydrogenotrophic denitrification is 0.2 mg H2 ·L−1 . In turn, Tong et al. [42] investigated
the treatment process of wastewater with parameters corresponding to groundwater con-
taminated with nitrogen compounds (the initial concentration of nitrates and nitrites and
ammonia was 16.316 mg N·L−1 , 2.715 mg N·L−1 , and 1.088 mg N·L−1 , respectively) via
simultaneous autotrophic and heterotrophic denitrification (C/N = 0.6). Nitrite accumu-
lation at the current densities range of 0–280.4 mA·m−2 decreased from 3.73 mg N·L−1
to 0 mg N·L−1 . A current density above 310.4 mA·m−2 increased nitrite concentration.
According to these authors, changes in nitrite concentration in the treated wastewater were
caused by fluctuations in H2 concentration as a result of electric current flow. Probably,
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 14
various concentrations of H2 (high within the electrode) might have also affected the course
of denitrification in the aforementioned study [43].

Figure 6. Percentage content of nitrogen forms in the influents and effluents (R1–R6) (DW-influent).
Figure 6. Percentage content of nitrogen forms in the influents and effluents (R1–R6) (DW-influent).
3.4. Removal of Phosphorus Compounds
3.4. Removal of Phosphorus Compounds
The mean concentration of phosphorus in the wastewater inflowing to the bio-electrochemical
The mean
reactors concentration
was 103.8 ± 5.3 mg Pof ·L−phosphorus
1 . The highestin efficiency
the wastewater inflowing
of phosphorus to the bio-elec-
removal (Figure 7),
trochemical reactors was 103.8 ± 5.3 mg P·L −1. The highest efficiency of phosphorus re-
reaching 94.9 ± 0.7% (R2) and 97.1 ± 0.6% (R5), was recorded in the reactors, where the
moval (Figure
electric current7),flew
reaching 94.9the
through ± 0.7%
first(R2)
12 hand
of the97.1cycle.
± 0.6%In(R5), was recorded
the sodium acetatein the reac-
variant, the
tors, where
lowest totalthe electric current
phosphorus flewefficiency,
removal through the first 1290.4
reaching h of±the cycle.
1.6%, wasIn determined
the sodium ace-in R3
tate variant,
(electric the lowest
current flow intotal phosphorus
the second phaseremoval efficiency,
of the cycle). reaching
In contrast, 90.4acetic
in the ± 1.6%, was
acid de-
variant,
termined in R3 (electric current flow in the second phase of
the lowest efficiency of 93.9 ± 0.9% was determined at 24 h current flow. the cycle). In contrast, in the
acetic acid variant, the lowest efficiency of 93.9 ± 0.9% was determined at 24
The concentration of total phosphorus in the effluent from the reactors fed with sodiumh current flow.
acetate was between 5.3 ± 0.8 mg P·L−1 (R2) and 10.0 ± 1.7 mg P·L−1 (R3), whereas
respective values determined in the acetic acid variant ranged from 3.0 ± 0.6 mg P·L−1 (R3)
to 6.8 ± 0.9 mg P·L−1 (R5). The statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the mode
of bio-electrochemical reactors fed with a direct electric current on the concentration of total
phosphorus in the effluent in the variant with acetic acid used as the substrate. There were
no statistically significant differences in the concentration of total phosphorus in the treated
wastewater between the variant with sodium acetate used as the source of organic carbon
Energies 2023, 16, 7767
Figure 6. Percentage content of nitrogen forms in the influents and effluents (R1–R6) (DW-influent).
10 of 14

3.4. Removal of Phosphorus Compounds

The mean concentration of phosphorus in the wastewater inflowing to the bio-elec-
and the variants where wastewater was exposed to the electric current for 24 h (R1) and for
trochemical reactors was 103.8 ± 5.3 mg P·L−1. The highest efficiency of phosphorus re-
the first 12 h of the treatment cycle (R2). Statistically significant differences in the quality of
moval (Figure 7), reaching 94.9 ± 0.7% (R2) and 97.1 ± 0.6% (R5), was recorded in the reac-
wastewater were shown between reactor R3 (electric current flow for 12 h in the second
tors, where
phase thecycle)
of the electric
andcurrent flew
reactors R1through
and R2 the(α =first 12 h
0.05). of the
The typecycle. In the carbon
of organic sodiumsource
ace-
tate variant, the lowest total phosphorus removal efficiency, reaching 90.4 ± 1.6%,
had a statistically significant effect on the total phosphorus concentration in the effluent was de-at
termined in R3 (electric current flow in the second phase of the cycle). In contrast,
the 12 h electric current flow in both the first and second phase of the cycle. Such an effect in the
acetic
was acid variant, the
not observed lowest
in the efficiency
variants with of
the93.9 ± 0.9%
electric was determined
current flow for 24ath.24 h current flow.

Figure
Figure 7. 7. Total
Total phosphorus
phosphorus removalefficiency.
removal efficiency.

Analyzing
The the obtained
concentration of totalefficiencies
phosphorus of total phosphorus
in the effluent from removal (Figure 7)
the reactors and
fed wastew-
with so-
ater pH values (Figure 3), it may be speculated that the main process
dium acetate was between 5.3 ± 0.8 mg P·L−1 (R2) and 10.0 ± 1.7 mg P·L−1 (R3), whereas responsible for phos-
phorus removal
respective in reactors in
values determined R1–R3 (pH acid
the acetic > 8) variant
and R5 ranged
(pH = 7.16) was± precipitation
from 3.0 with
0.6 mg P·L−1 (R3)
calcium and magnesium ions. According to Mielcarek et al. [43], phosphorus
to 6.8 ± 0.9 mg P·L (R5). The statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the mode of
-1 precipitation
with Ca2+ and Mgreactors
bio-electrochemical
2+ ions from greenhouse wastewater occurs at pH > 7. The pH levels
fed with a direct electric current on the concentration of total
recorded inin
phosphorus R6the
(6.89) and R4
effluent (pHvariant
in the 3.65) indicate that acid
with acetic phosphorus
used as removal was mainly
the substrate. driven
There were
by electrocoagulation. The higher efficiency of phosphorus removal
no statistically significant differences in the concentration of total phosphorus in thein the reactors fed with
acetic acid (R4–R6) may be due to the enhanced electrocoagulation at
treated wastewater between the variant with sodium acetate used as the source of organic the beginning of the
cycle at acidic pH (pH approximated 3.88 after organic substrate addition). According to
carbon and the variants where wastewater was exposed to the electric current for 24 h (R1)
the literature data, the removal of phosphorus by electrocoagulation occurs more efficiently
and for the first 12 h of the treatment cycle (R2). Statistically significant differences in the
at the initial acidic pH [44,45]. Irdemez et al. [45] treated synthetic wastewater with a phos-
quality of wastewater were shown between reactor R3 (electric current flow for 12 h in the
phorus concentration of 100 mg P·L−1 using electrocoagulation (current intensity of 0.75A
second phase of the cycle) and reactors R1 and R2 (α = 0.05). The type of organic carbon
and experiment duration of 20 min) and achieved total phosphorus removal efficiencies
source had a statistically significant effect on the total phosphorus concentration in the
of 86%, 71%, and 64% at the initial pH values of 3.0, 6.0, and 9.0, respectively. In turn,
effluent at the 12 h electric current flow in both the first and second phase of the cycle.
Kuokkanen et al. [46] removed from 70% to 94% of total phosphorous at pH values of
Such an effect was not observed in the variants with the electric current flow for 24 h.
from 5 to 9, respectively. The initial concentration of total phosphorus in the cited study
was 30 mg P·L−1 , the electric current density was 100 A·m−2 , and the current flow time
was 15 min. The concentration of phosphorus in the effluent from the reactors was also
determined by the consumption of part of the total phosphorus during biomass synthesis.
The present study results show that it is possible to achieve a satisfactory technological
effect in a bio-electrochemical reactor without the need for electric current flow throughout
the 24 h treatment cycle. In reactor R2, under the presence of sodium acetate and electric
current flow within the first 12 h of the cycle, the nitrogen and phosphorus removal
efficiencies were 90.4 ± 1.6% and 94.9 ± 0.7%, respectively, while the efficiency of organic
compounds consumption during wastewater treatment was 97.1 ± 1.0%.
The treatment of wastewater from soilless tomato cultivation in bio-electrochemical
reactors involves supplying an external source of carbon to the treated wastewater. This
was due to the too-low efficiency of hydrogenotrophic denitrification. It was necessary to
supply heterotrophic denitrifiers with sodium acetate and acetic acid to the reactor. Only
thanks to this was it possible to reduce the nitrogen concentration in treated sewage to
below 55.0 mg N·L−1 , which does not allow it to be released into the environment. It is
therefore necessary to continue research to determine the impact of the time for supplying
electricity to the reactor and the C/N ratios at which it will be possible to reduce the
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 11 of 14

nitrogen concentration to levels below 40.0 and 30.0 mg N·L−1 . At the same time, it will
be necessary to bear in mind that the introduction of an external carbon source cannot
contribute to an increase in the concentration of carbon compounds in the reactor outflow
to a level unacceptable under applicable regulations. Moreover, it should be remembered
that extending the duration of the phase in which electricity is supplied and increasing
the dose of the external carbon source is associated with increased treatment costs, larger
amounts of sewage sludge and, therefore, an increase in the costs of sludge management.

4. Conclusions
So far, the results of research on the operation of bio-electrochemical reactors have
clearly indicated that the efficiency of the processes of removing organic compounds,
phosphorus, and nitrogen depends on the current density and the duration of the current
flow in the reactor. Increasing the values of these parameters contributed to the increase
in the efficiency of the mentioned processes. The research that is the subject of this article
proves that in a sequencing batch biofilm reactor, electric current does not have to flow
during the entire cycle, and the duration of the phase with current flow does not have
to be equal to the hydraulic retention time of the sewage in the reactor. Reducing the
duration of the phase with current flow did not reduce the efficiency of nitrogen and
phosphorus compound removal and ensured a more effective use of the external carbon
source and, consequently, lower concentrations of organic compounds in treated sewage.
This issue is important not only from the technological but also from the economic point of
view, because shortening the duration of the current flow will reduce the energy costs of
wastewater treatment, inhibit electrode digestion, prolong electrode life, and reduce the
concentration of the dissolving metal in the treated wastewater. The research results allow
us to formulate the following detailed conclusions:
1. Regardless of carbon source type, the 12 h period of current flow ensured a more
efficient consumption of carbon and a lower concentration of organic compounds in
the effluent than the 24 h current flow.
2. A significant impact of the supply mode and the duration of the electric current flow
on the removal efficiency and concentration of total nitrogen in the treated wastewater
was found for both external carbon sources.
3. For both carbon sources and for all supply modes and durations of the electric current
flow, the removal efficiency of phosphorus exceeded 90%. The lowest concentration
of phosphorus in the effluent was determined in the bio-electrochemical reactor with
12 h current flow in the first phase of the cycle and in the presence of acetic acid,
whereas the highest one was in the reactor with 12 h current flow in the second phase
of the cycle and the presence of sodium acetate.
4. The flow of electric current in the reactors resulted in an increased concentration of
total iron in the effluent.
5. From the energy consumption and technological standpoints, the most viable ap-
proach turned out to be feeding the reactor with sodium acetate and wastewater
exposure to the electric current flow only during the first 12 h of the treatment cycle. It
ensured 90.4 ± 1.6% and 94.9 ± 0.7% efficiencies of nitrogen and phosphorus removal,
respectively. In addition, it resulted in a low concentration of carbon compounds in
the effluent, reaching 23.2 ± 7.1 mg C·L−1 , due to the high consumption of organic
compounds during wastewater treatment (97.1 ± 1.0%).
6. The nitrogen removal efficiency in the bio-electrochemical reactor was higher in the
presence of sodium acetate.
7. A higher consumption of organic substrate and, consequently, the lowest concentra-
tion of organic compounds in the treated wastewater among all analytical variants
were determined in the reactors with sodium acetate, regardless of the electric power
supply mode.
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 12 of 14

8. In the case of the reactors fed with sodium acetate, the highest carbon removal
efficiencies (above 97.0%) were recorded under the 12 h current flow, whereas the
lowest ones were under the 24 h current flow.
9. The lowest efficiency of removing organic compounds, amounting to 65.6 ± 3.6%,
was recorded in the bio-electrochemical reactor with acetic acid used as a substrate
and electric current flow for 24 h. In the reactors with a 12 h current flow, the removal
efficiency of organic compounds exceeded 80%.
10. The lowest efficiency of total nitrogen removal, regardless of the carbon source,
was recorded in the reactors with a 24 h current flow and reached 81.8 ± 1.0% and
39.7 ± 5.5% in the sodium acetate and acetic acid variant, respectively.
11. The highest nitrogen removal efficiency (90.4 ± 1.6% and 89.9 ± 1.0%) was recorded in
the reactors with sodium acetate and 12 h wastewater exposure to the electric current.
12. The concentration of nitrites was higher in the effluent from the reactors with 12 h
than in those with 24 h current flow.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.M., K.Ł.B. and J.R.; methodology, A.M. and J.R.; soft-
ware, K.K.; validation, W.J., J.R. and M.K.; formal analysis, M.K. and J.R.; investigation, K.Ł.B. and
K.K.; resources, A.M.; data curation, K.Ł.B. and J.S.-S.; writing—original draft preparation, W.J.,
A.M. and J.R.; writing—review and editing, A.M., W.J. and J.S.-S.; visualization, K.Ł.B. and J.S.-S.;
supervision, A.M. and J.R.; project administration, A.M. and J.R.; funding acquisition, A.M. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The study was part of the project “Development a precise treatment of wastewater from
soilless tomato cultivation technology using electro biological hybrid reactor” as part of the LIDER X
program, financed by The National Centre for Research and Development No. LIDER/4/0019/L-
10/18/NCBR/2019. Co-financing amount: PLN 1,492,500.00.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or
in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Mielcarek, A.; Rodziewicz, J.; Janczukowicz, W.; Dobrowolski, A. Analysis of Wastewater Generated in Greenhouse Soilless
Tomato Cultivation in Central Europe. Water 2019, 11, 2538. [CrossRef]
2. Bugajski, P.; Kaczor, G.; Bergel, T. The Removal of Reliability Nitrogen in Wastewater Treatment Plant with Sequencing Biological
Reactor. Acta Sci. Pol. Form. Circumiectus 2015, 14, 19–27. [CrossRef]
3. Park, J.B.K.; Craggs, R.J.; Sukias, J.P.S. Removal of Nitrate and Phosphorus from Hydroponic Wastewater Using a Hybrid
Denitrification Filter (HDF). Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 3175–3179. [CrossRef]
4. Kwon, M.J.; Hwang, Y.; Lee, J.; Ham, B.; Rahman, A.; Azam, H.; Yang, J.S. Waste Nutrient Solutions from Full-Scale Open
Hydroponic Cultivation: Dynamics of Effluent Quality and Removal of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Using a Pilot-Scale Sequencing
Batch Reactor. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 281, 111893. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Ajeng, A.A.; Rosli, N.S.M.; Abdullah, R.; Yaacob, J.S.; Qi, N.C.; Loke, S.P. Resource Recovery from Hydroponic Wastewaters
Using Microalgae-Based Biorefineries: A Circular Bioeconomy Perspective. J. Biotechnol. 2022, 360, 11–22. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Zhou, T.; Liu, J.; Lie, Z.; Lai, D.Y.F. Effects of Applying Different Carbon Substrates on Nutrient Removal and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions by Constructed Wetlands Treating Carbon-Depleted Hydroponic Wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 357, 127312.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Rodziewicz, J.; Mielcarek, A.; Janczukowicz, W.; Jóźwiak, T.; Struk-Sokołowska, J.; Bryszewski, K. The Share of Electrochemical
Reduction, Hydrogenotrophic and Heterotrophic Denitrification in Nitrogen Removal in Rotating Electrobiological Contactor
(REBC) Treating Wastewater from Soilless Cultivation Systems. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 683, 21–28. [CrossRef]
8. Mielcarek, A.; Bryszewski, K.Ł.; Rodziewicz, J.; Janczukowicz, W. Single-Stage or Two-Stages Bio-Electrochemical Treatment
Process of Drainage from Soilless Tomato Cultivation with Alternating Current. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 299, 121762. [CrossRef]
9. Bryszewski, K.; Rodziewicz, J.; Mielcarek, A. Usuwanie w Reaktorze Typu Sequencing Batch Biofilm Reactor (SBBR) Azotu i
Fosforu Ze Ścieków Pochodzacych ˛ z Bezglebowej Uprawy Pomidorów. Gaz Woda I Tech. Sanit. 2018, Nr 5, 184–186.
10. Di Capua, F.; Papirio, S.; Lens, P.N.L.; Esposito, G. Chemolithotrophic Denitrification in Biofilm Reactors. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 280,
643–657. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 13 of 14

11. Kong, F.; Ren, H.Y.; Liu, D.; Wang, Z.; Nan, J.; Ren, N.Q.; Fu, Q. Improved Decolorization and Mineralization of Azo Dye in an
Integrated System of Anaerobic Bioelectrochemical Modules and Aerobic Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 2022,
353, 127147. [CrossRef]
12. Safari, M.; Rezaee, A.; Ayati, B.; Jafari, A.J. Autohydrogenotrophic Denitrification by a Bioelectrochemical Process: A Viability
Study. Iran J. Health Saf. Environ. 2014, 1, 53–58.
13. Park, H., Il; Kim, D.K.; Choi, Y.J.; Pak, D. Nitrate Reduction Using an Electrode as Direct Electron Donor in a Biofilm-Electrode
Reactor. Process. Biochem. 2005, 40, 3383–3388. [CrossRef]
14. Tong, S.; Liu, H.; Feng, C.; Chen, N.; Zhao, Y.; Xu, B.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, M. Stimulation Impact of Electric Currents on Heterotrophic
Denitrifying Microbial Viability and Denitrification Performance in High Concentration Nitrate-Contaminated Wastewater. J.
Env. Sci. 2019, 77, 363–371. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Kłodowska, I.; Rodziewicz, J.; Janczukowicz, W.; Cydzik-Kwiatkowska, A.; Rusanowska, P. Influence of Carbon Source on
the Efficiency of Nitrogen Removal and Denitrifying Bacteria in Biofilm from Bioelectrochemical SBBRs. Water 2018, 10, 393.
[CrossRef]
16. Xia, Y.; Chen, H.; Zhao, J.; Li, W. Shifts of Biomass and Microbial Community Structure in Response to Current Densities in a
Biofilm Electrode Reactor for NOx Removal. Energy Fuels 2019, 33, 5415–5421. [CrossRef]
17. Wei, V.; Elektorowicz, M.; Oleszkiewicz, J.A. Influence of Electric Current on Bacterial Viability in Wastewater Treatment. Water
Res. 2011, 45, 5058–5062. [CrossRef]
18. Mohammadi, A.; Khadir, A.; Tehrani, R.M.A. Optimization of Nitrogen Removal from an Anaerobic Digester Effluent by
Electrocoagulation Process. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7, 103195. [CrossRef]
19. Ghazouani, M.; Bousselmi, L.; Akrout, H. Combined Electrocoagulation and Electrochemical Treatment on BDD Electrodes for
Simultaneous Removal of Nitrates and Phosphates. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 104509. [CrossRef]
20. Sahu, O.; Mazumdar, B.; Chaudhari, P.K. Treatment of Wastewater by Electrocoagulation: A Review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
2014, 21, 2397–2413. [CrossRef]
21. Attour, A.; Touati, M.; Tlili, M.; Ben Amor, M.; Lapicque, F.; Leclerc, J.P. Influence of Operating Parameters on Phosphate Removal
from Water by Electrocoagulation Using Aluminum Electrodes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2014, 123, 124–129. [CrossRef]
22. Omwene, P.I.; Kobya, M.; Can, O.T. Phosphorus Removal from Domestic Wastewater in Electrocoagulation Reactor Using
Aluminium and Iron Plate Hybrid Anodes. Ecol. Eng. 2018, 123, 65–73. [CrossRef]
23. Rodziewicz, J.; Mielcarek, A.; Bryszewski, K.; Janczukowicz, W.; Kłobukowska, K. Energy Consumption for Nutrient Removal
from High-Nitrate and High-Phosphorus Wastewater in Aerobic and Anaerobic Bioelectrochemical Reactors. Energies 2022, 15,
7251. [CrossRef]
24. Rajaniemi, K.; Tuomikoski, S.; Lassi, U. Electrocoagulation Sludge Valorization—A Review. Resources 2021, 10, 127. [CrossRef]
25. Lei, Y.; Hidayat, I.; Saakes, M.; van der Weijden, R.; Buisman, C.J.N. Fate of Calcium, Magnesium and Inorganic Carbon in
Electrochemical Phosphorus Recovery from Domestic Wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 362, 453–459. [CrossRef]
26. Lee, J.Y.; Rahman, A.; Azam, H.; Kim, H.S.; Kwon, M.J. Characterizing Nutrient Uptake Kinetics for Efficient Crop Production
during Solanum Lycopersicum Var. Cerasiforme Alef. Growth in a Closed Indoor Hydroponic System. PLoS ONE 2017, 12,
e0177041. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Tejera, J.; Hermosilla, D.; Gascó, A.; Miranda, R.; Alonso, V.; Negro, C.; Blanco, Á. Treatment of Mature Landfill Leachate
by Electrocoagulation Followed by Fenton or UVA-LED Photo-Fenton Processes. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2021, 119, 33–44.
[CrossRef]
28. Krystynik, P.; Masin, P.; Krusinova, Z.; Kluson, P. Ecologically Non-Invasive Decontamination of Natura 2000 Locality from Old
Deposits of Hexavalent Chromium and Bivalent Nickel by Modular Electrocoagulation Combined with Ca(OH)2 Addition. Water
2020, 12, 2894. [CrossRef]
29. He, Y.; Wang, Y.; Song, X. High-Effective Denitrification of Low C/N Wastewater by Combined Constructed Wetland and
Biofilm-Electrode Reactor (CW–BER). Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 203, 245–251. [CrossRef]
30. Moreno-Casillas, H.A.; Cocke, D.L.; Gomes, J.A.G.; Morkovsky, P.; Parga, J.R.; Peterson, E. Electrocoagulation Mechanism for
COD Removal. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2007, 56, 204–211. [CrossRef]
31. Benhadji, A.; Taleb Ahmed, M.; Maachi, R. Electrocoagulation and Effect of Cathode Materials on the Removal of Pollutants from
Tannery Wastewater of Rouïba. Desalination 2011, 277, 128–134. [CrossRef]
32. Eyvaz, M. Treatment of Brewery Wastewater with Electrocoagulation: Improving the Process Performance by Using Alternating
Pulse Current. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2016, 11, 4988–5008. [CrossRef]
33. Zhao, Y.; Feng, C.; Wang, Q.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Sugiura, N. Nitrate Removal from Groundwater by Cooperating Heterotrophic
with Autotrophic Denitrification in a Biofilm–Electrode Reactor. J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 192, 1033–1039. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Hao, R.; Li, S.; Li, J.; Meng, C. Denitrification of Simulated Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Using a Three-
Dimensional Biofilm-Electrode Reactor: Operating Performance and Bacterial Community. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 143, 178–186.
[CrossRef]
35. Wang, Q.; Xu, J.; Ge, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Feng, H.; Cong, Y. Efficient Nitrogen Removal by Simultaneous Photoelectrocatalytic Oxidation
and Electrochemically Active Biofilm Denitrification. Electrochim. Acta 2016, 198, 165–173. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 7767 14 of 14

36. Lin, X.; Yin, H.; Wang, L.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, F.; Pu, Y.; Tang, X. Study of a Three-Dimensional Biofilm-Electrode Reactor (3D-BER)
That Combined Heterotrophic and Autotrophic Denitrification (HAD) to Remove Nitrate from Water. RSC Adv. 2023, 13,
14675–14684. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37. Zhu, M.; Fan, J.; Zhang, M.; Li, Z.; Yang, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, X. Current Intensities Altered the Performance and Microbial
Community Structure of a Bio-Electrochemical System. Chemosphere 2021, 265, 129069. [CrossRef]
38. Du, R.; Peng, Y.; Cao, S.; Li, B.; Wang, S.; Niu, M. Mechanisms and Microbial Structure of Partial Denitrification with High Nitrite
Accumulation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 2011–2021. [CrossRef]
39. Wang, J.; Chu, L. Biological Nitrate Removal from Water and Wastewater by Solid-Phase Denitrification Process. Biotechnol. Adv.
2016, 34, 1103–1112. [CrossRef]
40. Di Capua, F.; Pirozzi, F.; Lens, P.N.L.; Esposito, G. Electron Donors for Autotrophic Denitrification. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 362,
922–937. [CrossRef]
41. Chang, C.C.; Szu, K.T.; Hsien, K.H. Hydrogenotrophic Denitrification with Immobilized Alcaligenes Eutrophus for Drinking
Water Treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 1999, 69, 53–58. [CrossRef]
42. Tong, S.; Chen, N.; Wang, H.; Liu, H.; Tao, C.; Feng, C.; Zhang, B.; Hao, C.; Pu, J.; Zhao, J. Optimization of C/N and Current
Density in a Heterotrophic/Biofilm-Electrode Autotrophic Denitrification Reactor (HAD-BER). Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 171,
389–395. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Mielcarek, A.; Jóźwiak, T.; Rodziewicz, J.; Bryszewski, K.; Janczukowicz, W.; Kalisz, B.; Tavares, J.M.R. Recovery of Phosphorus
and Other Minerals from Greenhouse Wastewater Generated during Soilless Tomato Cultivation by Means of Alkalizing Agents.
Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 892, 164757. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Behbahani, M.; Moghaddam, M.R.A.; Arami, M. A Comparison between Aluminum and Iron Electrodes on Removal of Phosphate
from Aqueous Solutions by Electrocoagulation Process. Int. J. Environ. Res. 2011, 5, 403–412.
45. Irdemez, Ş.; Demircioǧlu, N.; Yildiz, Y.Ş.; Bingül, Z. The Effects of Current Density and Phosphate Concentration on Phosphate
Removal from Wastewater by Electrocoagulation Using Aluminum and Iron Plate Electrodes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2006, 52,
218–223. [CrossRef]
46. Kuokkanen, V.; Kuokkanen, T.; Rämö, J.; Lassi, U.; Roininen, J. Removal of Phosphate from Wastewaters for Further Utilization
Using Electrocoagulation with Hybrid Electrodes—Techno-Economic Studies. J. Water Process Eng. 2015, 8, e50–e57. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.