State-of-the-Art Review

Electrocoagulation Treatment of Electroplating

Wastewater: A Review
Deepak Sharma 1; Parmesh Kumar Chaudhari 2; Savita Dubey 3;
and Abhinesh Kumar Prajapati 4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Electrochemical methods such as electrocoagulation (EC), electrooxidation (EO), and electroreduction (ER) are promising tech-
nologies to remove organics and heavy metals contained in industrial effluents discharged from numerous industries such as electroplating,
textile, and metal processing. EC is widely applicable to treat wastewater that has a wide range of pollutants as well as being applicable to
treating organic pollutants having a chemical oxygen demand (COD) range of 1,000–13,000 mg=L, and metals concentration in the range of
10–2,500 mg=L depending on the type of pollutants/metals. Several parameters such as pH, current density, electrode gap, electrolysis time,
and agitation speed plays a major role during EC. Various laboratory results show that EC works effectively in the pH range 2–8, current
density 20–200 A=m2, electrode gap 1.5–3 cm, electrolysis time 10–150 min, and stirrer speed 30–200 rpm for the reactor size 1–2.5 L
depending on the type of wastewater/effluent. Moreover, this process has been proved to be versatile and environmentally friendly. This
review mainly focuses on the separation of heavy metals from electroplating effluent (EPE), including other pollutants removal from various
industrial effluents such as textile, distillery, paint, and tannery. EC operation is oriented on the supply of direct current in metal electrodes
and, consequently, metal ions released into the solution. This results in an increased metal concentration in the solution that finally precipitates
as metal hydroxides along with pollutants. Numerous techniques are available to treat heavy metals bearing effluent, which includes
precipitation, adsorption, bioadsorption, ion exchange, and membrane separation. These methods have several limitations in term of
high operating costs and a large amount of sludge generation, while the EC process has several advantages over conventional technologies
such as requirement of less external chemicals, easier installation, lower secondary pollutants formation, odor and color removal, and lower
residence time. However, high electricity consumption due to formation of oxide film on the surface of the electrode is a major drawback of
this process because oxide film works as an electric insulator. Overall, the EC method has wide potential to treat different kinds of effluents.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001790. © 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Electroplating effluent; Metal removal; Organic load; Electrocoagulation; Operating parameter.

Introduction treatment. The Indian government has made very strict norms against
industries to regulate the amount and quality of effluent. The gov-
Water pollution is a global problem and presents one of the most ernment also thrusts on the minimization of fresh water use, and
crucial challenges of the twenty-first century. Many water and emphasize on the reuse or recycle of treated water. Therefore, it is
wastewater treatment technologies have been developed in the last necessary to treat industrial effluent before discharging it into the
few decades for the removal of diverse aquatic pollutants. Due to a water-receiving bodies (Sharma et al. 2020; Prajapati et al. 2016).
boom in industrialization, the demand for water in this sector The electroplating (EP) industry is one of the largest sectors in
has increased abruptly, and if the utilization is not planned system- India, and provides employment to millions of people. It is one of
atically then it will pose a threat to the global environment. Water the oldest but most important sectors for the economic growth of
is used in industries for various purposes such as scrubbing, as a the country. There are several types of EP industries, which include
coolant, a carrier, and as raw material. The wastewater generated zinc plating, chromium plating, lead plating, and nickel plating.
from industries contains heavy metals and several contaminants Consequently, these industries discharge various types of metals
that cannot be discharged in any water-receiving bodies without such as zinc, lead, chromium, and nickel depending on the type
of metal finishing performed there.
1 In the EP process, a thin layer of metal on the surface of an
Research Scholar, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, National Institute of
Technology, Chhattisgarh 492001, India. Email: [email protected] object is deployed. The objects are to be either placed or suspended
2
Associate Professor, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, National Institute in an electrolytic solution, which serves as a cathode in the electro-
of Technology, Chhattisgarh 492001, India. Email: pkchaudhari.che@nitrr lytic deposition process. The anode is usually a plate of the metal to
.ac.in be deposited. During the process, a huge amount of fresh water is
3
Associate Professor, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, IPS Academy, used. Out of this, about 40% of the water is used in the process and
Institute of Engineering and Science, Madhya Pradesh 452012, India. the remaining water comes out in the form of wastewater, which
Email: [email protected] is known as electroplating effluent (EPE) (Prajapati et al. 2016).
4
Associate Professor, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, IPS Academy,
These effluents contain several types of heavy metals, which if di-
Institute of Engineering and Science, Madhya Pradesh 452012, India
(corresponding author). Email: [email protected]
rectly discharged into any water body are harmful for the aquatic
Note. This manuscript was published online on July 21, 2020. Discus- ecosystem. They may cause various diseases in humans who come
sion period open until December 21, 2020; separate discussions must be in contact with the polluted water, such as stomach cramps, skin
submitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of En- irritations, vomiting, nausea, and anemia (Vaikosen and Alade
vironmental Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9372. 2011). The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB 2011) of India

© ASCE 03120009-1 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 has determined the threshold limit of heavy metals that should be the anode, typical hydrogen production occurs (Prajapati et al.
present in water. Due to this, proper treatment of EPE is required 2014a). As aforementioned, Al and Fe are mostly applied as sac-
before it is discharged into pure-water streams. rificial electrodes during the EC process; the reactions take place in
A number of treatment methods such as electrocoagulation (EC) the case of the Fe electrode is illustrated.
(Hunsom et al. 2005), precipitation (Feng et al. 2000), coagulation
(Li et al. 2003), adsorption (Wang et al. 2003), biosorption (Wang
et al. 2009), ion-exchange (Dabrowski et al. 2004), electrodialysis At Anode
(Tzanetakis et al. 2003), electrodeionization (Feng et al. 2007;
Semmens et al. 2001), and membrane separation (Baraka and Fe → Fe2þ þ 2e−
Schmidt 2010; Kryvoruchko et al. 2002; Ozaki et al. 2002; Qin
et al. 2002) are available to treat EPE. Among all these techniques, When the pH is alkaline
EC has proved itself to be an excellent and prominent technique Fe2þ þ 2OH− → FeðOHÞ2
because of its simplicity in operation, low volume of sludge gener-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ated, and being cost-effective. Moreover, EC is an efficient process At acidic pH, the electrode is attacked by Hþ
for the removal of both organic and inorganic pollutants contained in
wastewater. EC has the capacity to eradicate the disadvantages of 1 5
Fe2þ þ O2 þ H2 O → FeðOHÞ3 þ 2Hþ
several treatment techniques and emerge as a sustainable and eco- 4 2
nomically viable method for the treatment of contaminated effluent.
Fe2þ gets oxidized to Fe3þ by oxygen present in water
This process has been successfully used for the treatment of electro-
plating wastewater, chemical mechanical polishing effluent, metal 1 1
finishing, and metal plating effluent (Adhoum et al. 2004). Fe2þ þ O2 þ H2 O → Fe3þ þ OH−
4 2
In the last few decades, the acceptability of EC technology has
gained popularity to treat industrial effluents. Among these, re- The oxygen is also evaluated at the anode by the reaction
moval of hazardous metals from EPE is one of them. This work
2H2 O → O2 þ 4Hþ þ 4e−
includes several novelties such as the detailed literature review
on treatment of EPE using EC along with other industrial effluents.
The mechanism of EC is presented in detail with updated informa-
tion. The paper presents a detailed discussion about advantages, At Cathode
disadvantages, limitations, and gaps of EC. Moreover, the detailed 2H2 O þ 2e− → H2 þ 2OH−
study of operating parameters of the EC method such as electrode
thickness, electrode spacing/gap, cell potential, limiting current, The Fe2þ and Fe3þ ions hydrate and hydrolyze in the EC reactor
bubble size distribution and its control, electrode passivation and and form various monomeric and polymeric species like FeðOHÞþ 2,
flake deposition, polarity reversal, anodic dissolution, temperature, FeOHþ 4þ − þ 2þ
2 , Fe2 ðOHÞ2 , FeðOHÞ4 , FeðH2 OÞ2 , FeðH2 OÞ5 OH , and
potential of hydrogen, conductivity, agitation speed, electrolysis FeðH2 OÞ4 ðOHÞ2þ (Albert 1996). When Al electrodes are used, the
time, shape of electrode, and arrangement of electrodes along with following reactions take place.
detailed information about these parameters are also incorporated.
The present work elucidated to review the state-of-the-art EC pro-
cess and its wide range of applications in the treatment of EPE, At Anode
as well as wastewater from different industries. The concept of
EC and its mechanism are explained in detail. Furthermore, the Al3þ þ 3e− → Al
effect of various operating parameters such as pH, current density,
electrode gap, and electrolysis time on the EC process are also Al3þ þ H2 O → AlðOHÞ2þ þ Hþ
discussed in detail.
AlðOHÞ2þ þ H2 O → AlðOHÞ2þ þ Hþ

Electrocoagulation AlðOHÞ2þ þ H2 O → AlðOHÞ3þ þ Hþ

EC is a complex process with a combination of multiple mecha-

nisms operating simultaneously to remove the heavy metals At Cathode
and other pollutants. This process is accomplished in four steps,
specifically: (1) electrolytic reactions at the surface of electrode, 2H2 O þ 2e− → H2 þ 2OH−
(2) coagulants formation in the aqueous phase by hydroxides of
anodic metal, (3) adsorption/enmeshment of pollutants in flocks, A number of monomeric and polymeric compounds such
and (4) removal by electroflotation, sedimentation, and adhesion as AlðOHÞþ , AlOH2þ , Al2 ðOHÞ4þ þ4 2
2 , AlðOHÞ5 , AlðOHÞO ðsÞ, and
to bubbles (Prajapati et al. 2013, 2016). During EC, cations such −4
AlðOHÞ are formed (Ching et al. 1994). These hydroxide com-
as iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) are released from the electrodes that pounds have a large surface area as a coagulant, and have an out-
play a vital role in the increase of the coagulation of pollutants con- standing coagulating agent. The EC method has been deployed for
tained in wastewater (Prajapati et al. 2013). It is a well-known fact the removal of heavy metals such as chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni),
that the electrophoretic motion tends to agglomerate negatively and arsenic (As). The detailed literature review is elucidated in
charged particles toward the anode, and positively charged particles Table 1, which reflects that most of the heavy metals are removed
toward the cathode. In addition, consumable metal provides metal during the EC treatment. Most of the researchers found that 95% to
cations and metal hydroxide cations. These cations are responsible 100% of metals were removed successfully. From Tables 1 and 2, it
for neutralizing the negative ions contained in the effluent. It is re- is apparent that the EC process has better potential to remove or-
ported that during EC, oxygen is generated at the cathode, while at ganics pollutants rather than metal content. This may be due to

© ASCE 03120009-2 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 1. Electrocoagulation used for treatment of wastewater generated from electroplating industries in the batch reactor
Electrode d J/V Time Mo R P

© ASCE
Water and wastewater used material (mm) (mA=m2 ) (min) pHo Metal/others (mg=dm3 ) (%) (kW · h=m3 ) Reference
Simulated wastewater Al–Al 10 1.5 30 6 Zn, Fe Zn ¼ 10, Fe ¼ 10 90 — Doggaz et al. (2018)
Metal plating industry wastewater Fe–Fe 10 22.4 60 5 Cr, Pb Cr ¼ 55.4, Pb ¼ 3.5 91 — Sharma et al. (2020)
Simulated wastewater Al–Al 20 — 30 5 Pb PB (10–30) 99 — AlJaberi et al. (2018)
Synthetic smelting wastewater Al–FE 10 2.4 60 6 Cd, Zn, Mn Cd ¼ 15, Zn ¼ 92, 96 — Xu et al. (2017)
Mn ¼ 320
Tannery wastewater Fe–Fe 50 22.4 20 7 Cr — 100 0.13 Kongjao et al. (2008)
Galvanic wastewater Al–Fe 20 — 180 5 Ni, Cu, Cr Ni ¼ 2,000, Ni ¼ 95, Cu ¼ 100, 4.3 Heidmann and
Cu ¼ 500, Cr ¼ 700 Cr ¼ 65 Calmano (2010)
Metal plating wastewater Al–Al, Al–Fe, 10 100 20 7–9 Ni, Cu, Cr Ni ¼ 394, Cu ¼ 45, Ni ¼ 100, Cu ¼ 100, 10.07 Akbal and Camcı (2011)
Fe–Fe, Fe–Al Cr ¼ 44.5 Cr ¼ 100
Real wastewater of plating SS–SS 3 90 180 6–8 TOC, Zn, Ni TOC ¼ 171–173, TOC ¼ 66, Zn ¼ 100, — Kabdaşli et al. (2009)
industry Zn ¼ 217–225, Ni ¼ 100
Ni ¼ 248–260
Automotive assembly plant Al–Fe 11 60 25 3–6 Zn Zn ¼ 40, Zn ¼ 97, PO−−
4 ¼ 90 4.8 Kobya et al. (2010)
rinse water PO−−
4 ¼ 120
Contaminated ground water (As) Al–Fe 13 2.5 2.5 5.5–7.5 As As ¼ 15 As ¼ 99 0.014 Kobya et al. (2011)
Contaminated drinking water (Fe) Mg–Fe 5 35 120 6 Fe Fe ¼ 5–25 Fe ¼ 92 NA Vasudevan et al. (2009)
Wastewater of EPI Al–Al 10 62.5–125 120 7 Mn, Co Mn, Co ¼ 25–400 Mn ¼ 39.6, Co ¼ 63.9 NA
Wastewater of EPI Al–Al 6.25 30 8 Co Co ¼ 1000 Co ¼ 99 NA
Wastewater of EPI Al–Al 5 4.8 30 4–8 Cu, Zn, Cr Cu ¼ 800, Cu ¼ 99.9, Zn ¼ 99.9, NA Adhoum et al. (2004)
Zn ¼ 800, Cr ¼ 800 Cr ¼ 59.4
Metal plating wastewater Al–Fe 10 10 20 9 Cu, Cr, Ni Cu ¼ 45, Cr ¼ 44.5, Cu, Cr, and Ni ¼ 100 10.07 Akbal and Camcı (2011)
Ni ¼ 394
Metal plating wastewater SS–SS 3 9 120 6 TOC, Zn, Ni TOC ¼ 170, TOC ¼ 66, Zn ¼ 100, NA Kabdasi et al. (2009)

03120009-3
Z ¼ 236, Ni ¼ 282 Ni ¼ 100
Metal plating wastewater Fe–Fe 18 0.5 300 3–6 Cr(VI) CrðVIÞ ¼ 5 CrðVIÞ ¼ 60 NA Arroyo et al. (2009)
Plating industry wastewater Al–Al 5 8 3–9 Cr Cr ¼ 50 NA Borgheei et al. (2015)
Metal plating wastewater Al–Fe 15 40 20 3 Cr Cr ¼ 500 Cr ¼ 99 28.1 Mahvi and Bazrafshan
(2008)

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

Electroplating industrial Effluents Al–Fe NA 4.8 15 4–8 Cr Cr ¼ 800 Cr ¼ 99.9 NA Reddithota et al.
(2007)
Metal plating wastewater Al–Fe 10 25–100 60 3 Cu, Cr, Ni Cu ¼ 335, Cu ¼ 98.7, Cr ¼ 99.4, 0.78 Akbal and Camcı (2011)
Cr ¼ 193, Ni ¼ 526 Ni ¼ 99
Metal plating wastewater MS–MS 12 48.78 40 3.4 Cr(III) CrðIIIÞ ¼ 1000 CrðIIIÞ ¼ 99.8 NA Golder et al. (2007a)
Aqueous solution Al–Al 22 4.36 4.8 Cr(VI) CrðVIÞ ¼ 50 CrðVIÞ ¼ 42 5.02 Golder et al. (2007b)
Metal containing modal wastewater Fe–Fe 3 25 40 3 Cu, Ni, 250 all metals Cu, Ni, Zn ¼ 96, 49 Al Aji et al. (2012)
Zn, Mn Mn ¼ 72.6
Pulp mill effluents Fe–Fe 10 1 Cu Cu ¼ 1.25 Cu ¼ 97 NA
Metal plating wastewater Fe–Al 30 30 60 6 As As ¼ 1–1,230 As ¼ 78.9–99.6 NA Gomes et al. (2007)
Metal containing modal wastewater Fe–Fe 5 1 45 5–6 Cr(VI) CrðVIÞ ¼ 10–50 CrðVIÞ ¼ 100 NA Heidmann and
Calmano (2008)
Metal plating wastewater Fe–Al NA 6–8 As As ¼ 123 As ¼ 99.6 NA Ali et al. (2011)
Metal plating wastewater Fe–Al 15 56–222 55 9–10 Cr(VI) CrðVIÞ ¼ 100 CrðVIÞ ¼ 99 20.16 Keshmirizadeh et al.
(2011)
Electroplating industry effluent Fe–Fe 5 50 15 4 Cr(VI), CrðVIÞ ¼ 887, CrðVIÞ ¼ 100 NA Verma et al. (2013)
Cr(III) CrðIIIÞ ¼ 1,495 CrðIIIÞ ¼ 100
Portable wastewater Fe–Al NA 1.75–7.5 2.5 4–9 As As ¼ 150 As ¼ 93.5 (Al–Al), ðFe–FeÞ ¼ 0140, Kobya et al. (2011)
94 (Fe–Fe) ðAl–AlÞ ¼ 0254

J. Environ. Eng.
 Hanay and Hasar (2011)

Dermentzis et al. (2011)

Golder et al. (2007a, b)

Vasudevan et al. (2011)

Vasudevan et al. (2013)

most organics having their own functional groups and passing a net

Bhagawan et al. (2014)

Mahvi and Bazrafshan
Lacasa et al. (2011a)
Pociecha and Lestan
negative charge neutralized by metal and hydroxide cations formed

Golder et al. (2009)

Daniel et al. (2009)
Parga et al. (2005)
Reference
by the dissociation of electrode material. The neutralized mass fi-

Lakshmi (2011)
Vasudevan and
nally settles down. In the case of metals, the availability of negative
charges is less; therefore, the charge neutralization that did not oc-
cur causes removal of metal ions at a lower rate. Furthermore, this
(2010)

(2008)
technique is also useful to remove anionic and organic compounds.
Table 2 indicates that most of the anionic compounds were success-
fully removed due to its capability to remove multiple pollutants. In
(kW · h=m3 )

0.665 AC, addition, organics were also removed by EC in terms of chemical

1.002 DC
0.45 AC,
1.24 DC

1.007
oxygen demand (COD) as presented in Table 3. In some cases, the

23.34
NA
NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA
15.4
P

EC treatment method is unable to provide good efficiency for

pollutant removal, hence it can be used in conjunction with other
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

methods such as EC followed by reverse osmosis, EC followed by

adsorption, and so on. These have shown excellent results as pre-
sented in Table 4. It has been reported by several researchers that

Pb ¼ 99.5. Ni ¼ 96.4
Cu ¼ 100, Mn ¼ 85,

Cr ¼ 96.2, Cu ¼ 98,

Cr, Cu, Ni, Zn ¼ 99

Cu ¼ 99, Zn ¼ 62.5
EC provides better results as compared to other treatment methods,
Pb ¼ 95, Zn ¼ 68,

as presented in Table 5.
Cd ¼ 97.8 AC,

Cd ¼ 97.5 AC,
Cd ¼ 96.9 DC

Cd ¼ 96.2 DC

CrðVIÞ ¼ 99.9

CrðIIIÞ ¼ 80.5
(%)
R

AsðVIÞ ¼ 99

Cd ¼ 99%
As ¼ 99.9

Zn ¼ 100
Cd ¼ 66

B 93.2

Advantages

The EC process has many advantages, which are listed as follows:

• Electrochemical technology is advanced technology, simple to
Pb ¼ 170, Zn ¼ 50,

Pb ¼ 55, Ni ¼ 13.5
Cr ¼ 39, Cu ¼ 4,

Cr, Cu, Ni, Zn ¼

Cu ¼ 74.4, Zn ¼

use, portable, and avoids the salinity of the water.

(mg=dm3 )

CrðIIIÞ ¼ 8084
AsðVIÞ ¼ 2.24

• It is better than other conventional treatment methods because it

CrðVIÞ ¼ 800
Zn (50–200)
Mo

is proven to be distinct, reliable, versatile, energy efficient, and

Cd ¼ 500
Cd ¼ 1.5

Cd ¼ 20

Cd ¼ 20
As ¼ 20

Cu, Mn,

reasonable for the treatment of wastewater.

B 3–7

• It is very effective to treat a wide range of organic loads having

300

6.8

COD in the range of 1,000–13,000 mg=L. In many cases after

the EC process, further treatment is not required.
Metal/others

Cu, Mn, Zn

Cr, Cu, Pb,

Cr, Cu, Ni,

Pb, Zn, Cd

• EC treatment is more effective in place of coagulation where

Cu, Zn

metal hydroxides (chemicals) are used as coagulants, because

As(VI)

Cr(VI)

Cr(III)

EC treatment provides better adsorption of hydroxides on min-

Cd

Cd

Cd
As

Zn
Ni
B

eral surfaces as compared to coagulation.

• Electrons are participated in the treatment of wastewater which
5.5–9
pHo
7–9

4–9

1–7

4–8

4–8
NA
7.5

5.2

is clean reagents, and no extra reagents need to be added.

7

• During the EC process, harmful microorganisms such as

bacteria, viruses, and cysts are also killed. Therefore, there is
0.1–4
(min)
Time

4–45

5–35

NA

20

15
30

80

60

60

no need for other antimicrobial treatment like chlorination and

ozonation.
• EC targets to remove particle size 10−9 to 10−7 cm, so it is ef-
(mA=m2 )

16–128

13.08

48.78
0.2

0.2

0.2
NA

NA
J/V

fective in destabilizing even the smallest colloidal particle.

15

40

40

• It is simple equipment that could be designed virtually to any

size with low installation cost.
(mm)

• Current (I) and voltage (V) are easily controlled; therefore,

NA

NA
6
9

5
15

10

15

12

22
d

it is appropriate for facilitating data acquisition, process automa-

tion, and control. Effective control of the electron transfer rate
Carbon steel
Electrode

(current density) is also feasible.

material

MS–Al
Zn–Zn

Zn–SS
Al–SS
Fe–Al

Al–Al

Al–Al

Al–Al

Al–Fe
Fe–Fe

Al–Al

Al–Al

• EC treatment processes in the electrochemical cell are easily

controllable, thus requiring low maintenance.
• Secondary effluent is minimized as none of the chemicals are
added during the process.
Washing solution contaminated soil

• EC is more cost-effective than other treatment processes in

Contaminated ground water (As)

terms of equipment requirement and its operation.

Cadmium removal from water

Cadmium removal from water

• Measurement of the reaction conditions (current density and

Water and wastewater used

Boron removal from water

Electroplating wastewater
Electroplating wastewater

Electroplating wastewater
Metal plating wastewater

Metal plating wastewater

Industrial copper plating

electrode potential) is easy. EC-treated wastewater has low

Table 1. (Continued.)

organic, colourless and odourless, palatable, and more or less

Industrial wastewater

Industrial wastewater

clear water.
• The gas bubbles are evaluated during electrolysis, which enhan-
rinse effluent

ces flotation of pollutants at the top of the electrochemical

reactor (ECR), which can subsequently be skimmed off.
• Flocks obtained after the EC process and chemical process
are similar, except that EC-generated flocks are much larger,

© ASCE 03120009-4 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 2. Electrocoagulation used for treatment of different types of anionic impurities in the batch reactor (except Emamjomeh and Sivakumar 2009 and Ricordel et al. 2010)
Water and Electrode d J/V Time EA AI R

© ASCE
wastewater used material (mm) (mA=m2 ) (min) pH (cm2 ) (mg=dm3 ) (%) Reference
Well water Fe–Al 10 — 30 7 45 Fluoride ¼ 6.44 Fluoride ¼ 77 López-Guzmán et al. (2019)
Synthetic wastewater SS 15 11.7 50 — — Phosphate ¼ 500 Phosphate ¼ 99 Dura and Breslin (2019)
Synthetic wastewater Titanium 10 22.5 30 6 55 Phosphate ¼ 48 Phosphate ¼ 92 Tian et.al (2016)
Mining Wastewater FE–Fe 15 — 60 6 — Sulphate ¼ 10 Sulphate ¼ 90 Mamelkina et al. (2017)
Synthetic wastewater Al, Air–cathode, 10 15 30 5 40 Phosphate ¼ 30 Phosphate ¼ 30 Tian et al. (2016)
Graphite sheet
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Al 30 15 20 — 45 Cyanide ¼ 300 Cyanide ¼ 93 Moussavi et al. (2011)
Synthetic Wastewater Fe–Fe 10 40V 60 4.56 60 Cyanide ¼ 20–50 Cyanide ¼ <90 Hassani et al. (2011)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 30 11.1 25 7–7.2 240 Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 94.5 Behbahani et al. (2011b)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 10 30V 80 — 80 Fluoride ¼ 20 Fluoride ¼ 60 Drouiche et al. (2012)
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Fe 10 60V, 1A 60 6 80 Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 60 Drouiche et al. (2009)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 0.683 30 6–8 NA Fluoride ¼ 10 − 25 Fluoride ¼ 90 Emamjomeh and Sivakumar (2006)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 3.75 30 6–8 NA Fluoride ¼ 5–25 Fluoride ¼ 90 Emamjomeh and Sivakumar (2009)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 62.5 30 — NA Fluoride ¼ 4–10 Fluoride ¼ 90 Ghosh et al. (2008)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 1.875 60 6–8 NA Fluoride ¼ 10–25 Fluoride ¼ 90 Emamjomeh et al. (2011)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al — 1 5 6–6.1 238 Fluoride ¼ 5 Fluoride ¼ 80 Tezcan Un and Aytac (2011)
Steel industry wastewater Al–Al 15 30V 5 NA 150 Fluoride ¼ 5 Fluoride ¼ 93 Khatibikamal et al. (2010)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 10 8.16 NA NA 504 Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 100
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Al 2 4 NA 5–7 24 Fluoride ¼ 4.5 Fluoride ¼ 80 Zhao et al. (2011)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 2.2 30 3.4–7 64 Fluoride ¼ 4–6 Fluoride ¼ 80 Zuo et al. (2008)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 20 0.6A, 35V NA NA 504 Fluoride ¼ 27.8 Fluoride ¼ <80
Chemical mechanical Fe–Fe 10 12.5 320 NA 80 Fluoride ¼ 215, Fluoride ¼ 77, Drouiche et al. (2007)
polishing wastewater Phosphate ¼ 743, Phosphate ¼ 99.5,
Sulphate ¼ 241 Sulphate ¼ 82.6

03120009-5
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 9 — NA NA 100 Nitrate ¼ 109 Nitrate ¼ 100 Lacasa et al. (2011b)
Two different Fe–Fe 20 20V Ar ¼ 120, NA 76.2 Arsenic ¼ 1, Arsenic ¼ 75, Ricordel et al. (2010)
synthetic solutions NO3− ¼ 180 Nitrate ¼ 300 Nitrate ¼ 84
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 1 NA NA 1500 Phosphate ¼ 50 Phosphate ¼ 100 İrdemez et al. (2006b)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 9 3–5 50 NA 100 Phosphate ¼ 27 Phosphate ¼ 99.9 Lacasa et al. (2011c)

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

Synthetic wastewater Fe–Fe 5 1 NA 3–7 1500 Phosphate ¼ 100 Phosphate ¼ 86 İrdemez et al. (2006a)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Fe 5 1 NA 3 1500 Phosphate ¼ 100 Phosphate ¼ 100 İrdemez et al. (2006a)
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Al–SS 3 2 30 7 600 Phosphate ¼ 100 Phosphate ¼ 99 Vasudevan et al. (2009)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 3 7.5 NA 6.2 NA Phosphate ¼ 10–200 Phosphate ¼ 90 Bektaş et al. (2004)
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Fe 10 30V 25 4–9 80 Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 56 Drouiche et al. (2012)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 10 37.5 30 6 1.2 Fluoride ¼ 6,11.6 Fluoride ¼ 79; 68 Sinha et al. (2012)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al 5 NA NA NA NA Fluoride ¼ 10 Fluoride ¼ 90 Ghosh et al. (2011)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al, Fe–Fe NA 25 NA 3 NA Phosphate ¼ 400 Phosphate ¼ 100; 84.7 Behbahani et al. (2011b)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al NA 0.0167 25 7 NA Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 94.5 Behbahani et al. (2011a)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al, Fe–Fe NA 2–15 140 NA NA Phosphate ¼ 27 Phosphate ¼ 100 Lacasa et al. (2011c)
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Al, Fe–Fe, NA NA NA NA NA Cyanide ¼ 300 Cyanide ¼ 93; 87; 35; 32 Moussavi et al. (2011)
Al–Al, Al–Fe
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Fe, Al–Al NA NA 60 7.43 — Nitrate ¼ 105 Nitrate ¼ 90; 89.7 Malakootian et al. (2011)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al NA NA NA NA — Fluoride ¼ 5 Fluoride ¼ 96 Zhu et al. (2007)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al, Fe–Fe NA NA NA NA — Sulphate ¼ 100 Sulphate ¼ 68–72 Murugananthan et al. (2004)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al NA NA NA NA — Fluoride ¼ 25 Fluoride ¼ 100 Hu et al. (2003)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al NA NA NA NA — Fluoride ¼ 16 Fluoride ¼ 87.5 Yang and Dluhy (2002)
Synthetic wastewater Al–Al NA NA NA NA — Fluoride ¼ 2.5 Fluoride ¼ 80 Mameri et al. (1998)
Synthetic wastewater Fe–Fe NA NA NA NA — Nitrate, Ammonia ¼ 5 Nitrate ¼ 100, Ammonia ¼ 15 Lin and Wu (1996)

J. Environ. Eng.
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 3. Electrocoagulation used for removal of various type of industrial effluent in the batch type reactor (except Valero et al. 2011 and Babu et al. 2007)
Electrode d J/V Time EA CODo R

© ASCE
Water and wastewater used material (mm) (mA=m2 ) (min) pHo (m2 ) (mg=L) (%) Reference
Automobile wash water effluent Al–Fe 10 28 40 6 — 1,010 99 Priya and Jeyanthi (2019)
Bypass wastewater Fe–Fe 15 22 40 — 7.5 200 87 Elnakar and Buchanan (2019)
Biodiesel wastewater Fe–Al 7.5 32 30 6 288 404 91 Tanattı et al. (2018)
Industrial wastewater Fe–Fe 10 30 40 8 45 — 97 Gong et al. (2017)
Oily wastewater Fe–Fe 20 40 40 7 — 3,500 99
Real industrial wastewater Al–Al 20 25 30 6 — — 100 Gatsios et. Al (2015)
Paper mill wastewater Al–Fe 10 70 60 5–7 80 1,700 87 Katal and Pahlavanzadeh (2011)
Petroleum refinery wastewater Al–Fe–SS NA 13 60 8 48 4,090 63–93 Bayramoglu et al. (2007)
Textile effluent Fe–Fe NA 600 3 10.6 6.4 485 85 Zaroual et al. (2006)
Olive mill effluent Al–Al 10 75 25 4–6 60 75.1 76 Adhoum et al. (2004)
Textile effluent Al–Fe NA 500–200 NA 7.6 NA 1,787 74–88 Zongo et al. (2009)
Chemical mechanical polishing effluent Al–Fe–Ti NA NA NA 6–8.7 72 500 75 Lai et al. (2003)
Almond industry effluent Fe–Al 10 2.2 30 6.1 351 5300 81 Valero et al. (2011)
Can manufacturing wastewater Al–Al 20 20 60 — 225 850 72 Kobya and Demirbas (2015)
Industrial wastewaters Al–Al NA NA 60 7–7.5 NA 2,500 95 Meas et al. (2010)
Industrial wastewaters Fe–Al NA 45.45 60 8 NA 2,000–2,500 69 Linares-Hernández et al. (2009)
Livestock wastewater Al–Al 11 30 20 8 90 2,240 84 Tak et al. (2015)
Phenolic wastewater SS–Zn 10 250 60 3.2 33.5 1,118 20.9 Fajardo et al. (2015)
Molasses wastewater Cu–Fe 20 33 200 8.5 128 4,150 54 Tsioptsias et al. (2015)
Oil tanning industry Al–Fe 15 40 10 6.74 15 21,000–25,000 94.44 Lakshmi and Sivashanmugam (2013)
Paint manufacturing wastewater Al–Fe 10 35 15 6.95 143 19,700 94 Akyol (2012)
Potato chips manufacturing Al–Fe 11 200 30 5 78 2,200–2,800 60 Kobya et al. (2006a)
Pulp and paper industry bleaching effluent Al–Al 30 15 20 7 25 620 94 Sridhar et al. (2011)
Tannery liming drum wastewater MS–Al 25 35 50 3 140 25,300 82 Şengil et al. (2009)

03120009-6
Tannery wastewater MS–Al 10 NA 60 8.5 NA 2,400–2,600 68 Feng et al. (2007)
Tannery wastewater Fe–Al NA NA NA 25 100 3,200 69 Babu et al. (2007)
Textile effluent Fe–Al 11 100 10 6 78 2,422 60–65 Kobya et al. (2003)
Textile effluent Fe–Al 20 30 15 7, 7.9 NA 2,031 65, 63 El-Naas et al. (2009)
Textile effluent Fe–Al 20 50 40–120 7 105 3,260 85–95 Zodi et al. (2009)

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

Refectory oily wastewater Fe–Fe 10 NA 100–150 NA NA 500–1,500 75 Xu and Zhu (2004)
Olive mill Al–Fe 10 NA NA 3–5.9 NA 220 62–86
Poultry slaughter house Al–Fe 11 NA NA NA 50 26,000 93 Kobya et al. (2006b)
Food processing Al–Al 10 NA NA NA 100.1 22,956 88 Barrera-Díaz et al. (2006)
Rose processing Fe–Fe NA NA NA NA 48 9,500 79.8 Avsar et al. (2007)
Slaughterhouse wastewater Al–Fe NA NA NA NA 6.28 4,000 96.6 Budiyono and Johari (2010)
Textile wastewaters Al–Fe NA NA NA NA 98.5 1,953 93 Tezcan et al. (2011)
Rice grain-based distillery effluent Cu–Cu 1.5 89.3 60 3.5 56 11,500 80 Prajapati et al. (2016)
Rice grain-based distillery effluent Fe–Fe 15–25 99 120 8 56 13,600 94 Prajapati et al. (2014a)
Rice grain-based distillery effluent Al–Al 15 89.3 60 8 56 13,800 93 Prajapati et al. (2014b)
Rice grain-based distillery effluent Fe–Fe 15 99.3 120 8 50.4 13,800 83 Prajapati et al. (2013)
Distillery wastewater Graphite–Ti NA 1.5–5.5 NA 6.9–7.2 NA 2,000 80.6 Manisankar et al. (2004)
Industrial wastewater Fe–Fe NA 45.45 NA 8 66 NA 84
Distillery wastewater Fe–Fe NA 60 NA 4 100 NA 92.6 Yavuz (2007)
Tannery wastewater Al–Al 20 400 360 6 105 5.8 99 Elabbas et al. (2016)
Bilge water Al–Al 10 10 120 7 45 21,120 85 Aswathy et al. (2016)

J. Environ. Eng.
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 4. Combination of electrocoagulation in batch mode with other methods to treat wastewater
Water and Initial concentration

© ASCE
wastewater used Combination Results (mg=L) Reference
Industrial wastewater Electrocoagulation floatation 70% Removal of nitrate 300 ppm Nazlabadi et.al (2019)
treatment
Real wastewater Electrocoagulation combined with adsorption 89% TOC removed 500 ppm Myllymäki et al. (2018)
Pharma wastewater Intermittent electrocoagulation 90% Removal (dynapar) 10 g Ensano et al. (2017)
Real textile wastewater Electrocoagulation, electrochemical Fenton, Color removal ¼ 77–94%, COD ¼ 1,310 Ghanbari and Moradi (2015)
Electro-Fenton and peroxi-coagulation COD removal EC ¼ 78.6%
ECF ¼ 82.1%. EF ¼ 64.2%.
PC ¼ 71.1
Coke wastewater Electrocoagulation and electrochemical Removal efficiencies of COD, COD ¼ 6,300, TOC ¼ 2,200, Ozyonar and Karagozoglu (2015)
perioxidation process TOC, Phenol, CN, and SCN, Phenol ¼ 1,500 CN ¼ 215,
In EC were 26%, 20%, 9%, 9.2%, SCN ¼ 415
8.2%, In ECP 92%, 90%, 97.6%,
90%, 93.6%
Industrial wastewater Electrocoagulation–electrooxidation, processes In EC is COD ¼ 80–89%, COD ¼ 2,300, TOC ¼ 1,080.33
treatment powered by solar cells Color ¼ 91–97%, TOC ¼ 48%
In EC + EO TOC ¼ 70.26,
COD ¼ 99.7%
Oily wastewater Dynamic membrane/electrocoagulation hybrid system Oil removal rate was high at pH NA Yang et al. (2015)
High strength wastewater Membrane-based purification process coupled with COD ¼ 10,017, TOC ¼ 2,332 COD ¼ 96.6%, TOC ¼ 90% Sanyal et al. (2015)
electrocoagulation
Industrial wastewater Combination of electrocoagulation and reverse osmosis COD ¼ 280, Turbidity ¼ 135 COD ¼ 66.64% and Zhao et al. (2014)
membrane turbidity at 93.80%
Real textile wastewater Combination of electrocoagulation, photo-Fenton oxidation, COD ¼ 408 COD ¼ 65% Manenti et al. (2014)
and activated sludge biological degradation

03120009-7
Distillery wastewater Combination of ozone-assisted electrocoagulation COD ¼ 83% COD ¼ 2,500 Asaithambi et al. (2012)
Gray water Electrocoagulation and a submerged membrane bioreactor COD ¼ 60% COD ¼ 1,270 Bani-Melhem and Smith (2012)
technology
Synthetic wastewater Advance oxidation coupled with electrocoagulation Cr ¼ 99% NA Durante et al. (2011)
Industrial wastewater Combination of electrocoagulation and chemical Arsenic removal was high in NA Lakshmanan et al. (2010)

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

coagulation electrocoagulation then chemical
coagulation.
Laundry wastewater Combination of electrocoagulation/electroflotation COD removal per joule 999 mg=dm3 =kWh NA Wang et al. (2009)
Refractory industry Combined electrocoagulation and TiO2 photo-assisted Turbidity ¼ 91%, COD ¼ 86% COD ¼ 1,753, Boroski et al. (2009)
wastewater treatment Turbidity ¼ 25.50 NTU
Desizing wastewater Combination of catalytic thermal treatment and COD ¼ 86%, Color ¼ 96% COD ¼ 2,884, Color ¼ 520 PCU Kumar et al. (2009)
coagulation

J. Environ. Eng.
 Khandegar and Saroha (2013b)
Khandegar and Saroha (2013a)
containing less bound water, and therefore improve filterability

Nippatla and Philip (2019)

and settling characteristics of the treated slurry.

Muthukumar et al. (2010)

Deghles and Kurt (2016)
• Produces less total dissolved solids (TDS) in the treated

Bassyouni et al. (2017)

Ouaissa et al. (2012)

Farhadi et al. (2012)

Reference wastewater in comparison to other conventional (coagulation/

Verma et al. (2013)

Chafi et al. (2011)

Zhao et al. (2012)

flocculation, wet oxidation) methods.

Can et al. (2006)

• The EC treatment process provides low-volume sludge, and
the sludge formed has quick settling characteristics with easy
dewaterability.
• It is green technology as it requires low power, and it can be run
on power sources from green processes such as solar, wind, and
fuel cells, and is convenient in remote areas.
Turbidity (NTU) 40.7 CrðVIÞ ¼ 232 • EC processes run at very high electrochemical efficiency and
operate essentially under the same conditions for a wide variety
Chromium(III) 1,495
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Initial concentration

Chromium(VI) 887

COD ¼ 200–1,000
of wastewaters.

COD ¼ 3,422
•

COD ¼ 242
EC operation is feasible at ambient temperature and atmospheric
100 ppm
(mg=L)

pressure, thus reduces the possibility of volatilization.

2,983

2,800
190

200
200
—
10

Gaps

The following gaps have been found during a review of published

articles:
• Most of the research has been performed on synthetic waste-
EC: 34.2%, Photo-electrocoagulation: 37.3%,

water rather than real industrial wastewater.

EC: COD ¼ 73%, EC þ ED: COD ¼ 92%
EC: COD ¼ 97%, EC þ EF: COD ¼ 92%

• Some amount of metal ions get dissolved in treated water, and

Electrocoagulation and electrocoagulation + adsorption EC: Turbidity ¼ 94.2%, CrðVIÞ ¼ 24.6

Peroxi-photo electrocoagulation:50.5%

recovery of these metals are still difficult.

EC: 100%, coagulation (Alum): <5%
CC: CrðIIIÞ ¼ 52.6%, CrðVIÞ ¼ 25.8
EC: COD ¼ 93%, EO: COD ¼ 81%

EC + Poly aluminum chloride: 80%

• A number of mechanisms such as ionic adsorption theory,

EC: Dye ¼ 87%, AO: Dye ¼ 75%

EC: Cr(III) and CrðVIÞ ¼ 100%,

Peroxi-electrocoagulation:57.7%,
EC: 97, Coagulation (Alum): 94

adsorption, sweep coagulation, and interparticle bridging have

EC: 23%, EC + Alum: 65%,

EC: 30%, EC þ H2 O2 : 76%

been used to describe EC; however, these theories are unable to

Results

explain the exact mechanism of EC.

• In some cases during EC, electrolytes like sodium chloride
EC: 98%, CC ¼ 53%

(NaCl) are used in the solution, which increases the amount

Table 5. Comparison of electrocoagulation performed in the batch reactor with other treatment methods

of chloride in treated water. Investigation toward use of other

CC ¼ 99.9%

chemicals is still required.

EC ¼ 96%

• Sludge obtained during the EC process contains a large amount

of metal ions. Not much research has been done toward recovery
of these metal ions.
Electrocoagulation and electro coagulation þ H2 O2

Limitations
Electrocoagulation and electrooxidation processes
Hybrid electrocoagulation/electrodialysis process

Use of the EC process has the following limitations:

Electrocoagulation, photo-electrocoagulation,
Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

Electrocoagulation and chemical coagulation

• Selection of electrode and overall maintenance of this process is

Anodic oxidation and electrocoagulation

not easy.
• Bubble size distribution and density control is tricky.
Comparison

• During the EC treatment process, the oxide film adheres to the

peroxi-photo electrocoagulation
peroxi-electrocoagulation, and

surface of the electrode, which affects the current-carrying

Electrocoagulation–floatation

capacity of the electrode.

• The minimum conductivity of the wastewater suspension may
be required depending on the reactor design and configuration.
• Toxic chlorinated organic compounds may be formed in situ in
the presence of chlorides.

Difficulty of Application of Electrocoagulation

Treatment in Industries
Water and wastewater used

Pharmaceutical wastewater
Electroplating wastewater

EC is effectively applied for the treatment of wastewater at a labo-

Synthetic dye solution
Industrial wastewater

ratory scale; however, industrial application of EC is still challeng-

Aqueous suspension
Tannery wastewater

Tannery wastewater
Textile wastewater
Textile wastewater

ing, which may be due to current research being oriented on the

Aqueous solution
Aqueous solution

batch reactor. Further, this method still has gaps to fill, such as
model development for optimization and design of the reactor.
of kaolinite

Plug board

Most industries rely on use of continuous process to treat waste-

Textile

water with the help of a well-designed system; therefore, imple-

mentation of the EC method is challenging.

© ASCE 03120009-8 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 As aforementioned, oxide film adheres on the surface of electro- uniform concentration of the feed and to ensure homogeneous
des that work as an insulator during current supply and, due to mixing in the reactor. A stirrer is used for continuous agitation
this, high electricity consumption occurs during the treatment of of solution in the ECR. The flow rate of the feed to the reactor
wastewater, consequently increasing operating cost. Therefore, is maintained through a peristaltic pump. The voltage across the
the implementation of this technology on an industrial scale will cell is maintained using a digital power supply. Samples are col-
depend on its ability to satisfy commercial criteria. Availability lected at fixed time intervals from the ECR outlet, then filtered
of well-established technologies, such as adsorption, biotechnol- and analyzed for pH, color, metal concentration, and other pollu-
ogy, and membrane technologies, also create a strong competition tants using suitable instruments. The prime advantage of such re-
for EC toward implementation in industrial applications. EC actor systems is a fixed coagulant requirement enabling better
followed by existing technologies would improve its chances of design and operational control. Continuous ECRs are inherently
success. dynamic in operation and stability, also the performance of the
ECRs at various flow rates and at varying pollution load can be
investigated. The electrode behavior with respect to flake/flock
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Types of Electrocoagulation deposition on the anode and its dissolution in the solution is an
additional advantage in continuous ECRs.
EC can be performed in batch and continuous type. A brief discus-
sion of both types of process is mentioned here.
Operating Parameters
Batch Electrocoagulation Process
The various operating parameters that are worth considering are as
This process is conducted in an EC reactor with a magnetic stirrer follows.
to agitate the solution (for proper mixing). Batch experiments may
be conducted with more than two stainless steel/aluminum or other
electrode configurations at varying current densities by using a DC Electrode Thickness
power supply as presented in Fig. 1. To optimize various param-
eters for high reactor efficiency, the experimental runs are taken Thicker and wider electrodes minimize the potential drop and are
at different current density, pH, and electrode gap as a function durable; moreover, these are easy to maintain during backwash
of electrolysis time. The samples are taken at definite time intervals, operations of the ECR.
and at the end of the process it is filtered, centrifuged, and analyzed
for pH, metal concentration, and color by using a pH meter, an Electrode Spacing/Gap
atomic adsorption spectrophotometer, and an ultraviolet-visible
spectrophotometer, respectively. In the batch process, we can treat At the time of electrolysis, concentration of solution near the cath-
a definite wastewater volume per treatment cycle. Batch processes ode becomes high, which is due to variation in mobility of ions
show steady-state behavior having a fixed volume and electrolysis present. However, by homogeneous agitation, this effect can be
time (t). The pH and metal concentration vary with a varying minimized. In this process, a very low amount of gas is generated,
amount of dissolution of the electrode (with time) as per the re- which particularly fills in the interelectrode gaps, and due to this,
quirement of the electrocoagulant generated in situ. the electrical resistance increases. The agitation lifts the gases, and
therefore resistance decreases. The use of perforated and corrugated
plates also enhances release of electrolytic gases. With the increase
Continuous Electrocoagulation Process in the electrode distance, there is a significant rise in resistance,
In a continuous reactor, the input and output flow rate may be which in turn increases power by relation P ¼ I 2 R. In the experi-
equal. The feed tank and the ECR are stirred continuously for the ment, the pollutant removal efficiency is investigated at various
electrode gaps and thus an optimum electrode gap is obtained.

Cell Potential
The anode and cathode plates are attached to the metal terminals,
which gives cell voltage (V) due to potential difference. The volt-
age depends on types of metallic electrode deployed and compo-
sitions of wastewater or solution in which electrodes are immersed.

Limiting Current
To obtain the electrochemical activity of a used anode for the elec-
trocombustion of the organics, normalized current efficiency, φ, is
defined as (Gherardini et al. 2001)

ICE
φ¼ ð1Þ
ICEi

where ICE is the instantaneous current efficiency obtained with the

anode under investigation, and ICEi is the instantaneous current
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup used for the
efficiency that will be obtained with an ideal anode. The limiting
electrochemical treatment.
current (I lim , A) is given by

© ASCE 03120009-9 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 I Lim ¼ 4S K M COD ð2Þ Temperature
The rate of most chemical and electrochemical reactions increases
I Lim ¼ 4S K M COD ¼ 4S K M CODo ½1 − X ð3Þ with an increase in temperature. The relationship between the rate
constant and the absolute temperature is explained by the Arrhenius
where s is anodic surface (m2 ), n is number of exchanged elec- expression
trons in electrooxidation reaction, K m is mass-transfer coefficient  
−Ea
(m=s), F is Faraday constant (96,487 C=mol), and C is the concen- k ¼ k0 exp ð5Þ
RT
tration of organic species in the solution (mol=m). Both I Lim and
C are time-dependent. CODi is the initial value of the COD where k is the reaction rate constant (unit depends on the order of
(mol O2 =m3 ), and X is the COD conversion during the EC process. the reaction), E is activation energy (kJ=mol), ko is the frequency
As it can be seen from Eq. (3), the limiting current decreases with factor (same unit as that of k), T is absolute temperature (K), and
an increase in COD conversion. R is universal gas constant [8.31541 J=ðmol · kÞ]. Temperature
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

effects seem to be less significant for EC treatment of wastewaters.

It is reported that an increase in temperature from 20°C to 60°C did
Bubble Size Distribution and Its Control
not have any influence on the electrochemical degradation of efflu-
Hydrogen is evolved at the cathode while oxygen at the anode. The ents from a flavor manufacturing facility using platinum anode
gas bubbles grow at the electrode surface and in the interelectrode (Ribordy et al. 1997).
space that works as an insulator. To reduce the accumulation of gas
bubbles in the interelectrode space and to avoid the increase in cell
Potential of Hydrogen
resistance, the electrolyte flow is directed between the electrodes to
sweep out the gas bubbles and to induce turbulence. The bubble As per various EC experiments performed, the initial pH (pH o )
size distribution depends on solution pH as well as the material of the wastewater highly affects the efficiency of the ECR process.
of the electrode. The effects of pHo on the EC of wastewater can be reflected by
the current efficiency values obtained and the solubility of metal
hydroxides. The pollutant removal efficiency depends upon the
Electrode Passivation and Flake Deposition pH of the solution and the best removal efficiency is obtained
One of the significant operational issues linked with EC treatment at optimum pH. The formation of the precipitates of metal hydrox-
is flake deposition on the anode (in real wastewaters) and electrode ides starts at a particular pH. Verma et al. (2013) studied the hexa-
passivation that influences ECR efficiency. The incidence of pas- valent chromium Cr(VI) removal from synthetic wastewater, the
sivation depends on both the type of metal and the bulk solution Cr(VI) removal efficiency was subjected to the pH of the solution.
environment. Passivation is recognized as a detrimental factor Numerous experiments were performed and concluded that the best
for the reactor performance as it increases the cell resistance be- Cr(VI) removal was at pH 4. They have also pinpointed that an
tween the electrodes, and thus more energy gets wasted on heating increase in pH of the solution was due to the generation of metal
the passivation layers. During EC studies on chromium removal, hydroxides during the EC process.
Osipenko and Pogorelyi (1977) observed the formation of magne-
sium hydroxide and calcium carbonate at the cathode and an oxide Conductivity
layer at the anode (an inhibiting layer), which diminished the effi-
The conductivity of the ECR feed (i.e., water, wastewater, and
ciency of the system.
electrolyte) is an important parameter in EC as it directly impacts
the energy required for achieving a given level of performance.
Polarity Reversal Therefore, for less energy consumption, the conductivity of the sol-
ution should be high. In certain wastewaters, if the conductivity is
Used electrodes normally show an eroded surface structure, and too low, then it is necessary to add some salts, such as common salt
when used in the EC treatment process it may show reduced re- (NaCl or mixed sea water) to enhance conductivity of the solution.
moval efficiencies of pollutants and also cause flake deposition
on the anodes (Mahesh et al. 2006; Zhou et al. 2005). This, in turn,
causes high power consumption. In order to eliminate this draw- Effect of Agitation Speed
back, Mahesh et al. (2006) conducted a series of experiments to Agitation maintains uniformity and avoids the formation of the
observe the phenomena of flake deposition and its removal by concentration gradient in the EC reactor. In addition, agitation is
reversing the polarity of the electrodes. responsible for maintenance of the velocity of generated ions dur-
ing EC. The pollutant removal efficiency is hereby dependent on
the uniform mixing of the solution. In the EC process, the increase
Anodic Dissolution
in the movement of generated ions and the formation of flocks is
A relation among the amount (m) of iron and hydroxide ions gen- directly proportional to the metal removal efficiency at the particu-
erated, current flow (I) and time (t) of electrolysis within the lar electrolysis time. Furthermore, as the agitation speed is higher
electrolytic cell can be represented by Faraday’s law than the optimum speed, the metal removal efficiency goes on de-
creasing at a particular level due to the breaking of flocks inside the
ItM reactor (Modirshahla et al. 2008).
m¼ ð4Þ
zF
Electrolysis Time
where M is the molecular weight (g=mol), z is the number
of electrons transferred in the reaction at the electrode, and F is The electrolysis time plays a versatile role in the metal removal
the Faraday’s constant (96,500 C=mol). High anodic dissolution efficiency, and the metal removal efficiency increases with elec-
causes anode loss but it may improve organic removal efficiency. trolysis time. The removal of metal ions occurs to some extent,

© ASCE 03120009-10 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 but after the optimum electrolysis time, the removal efficiency de- • The adsorptive characteristics of the EC-generated sludge
creases and becomes more or less constant. The various metal should be studied.
hydroxides are formed during electrolysis as the dissociation of • Sludge disposal studies need to be performed.
sacrificial electrodes takes place and its formation increases with
electrolysis time. After the optimum electrolysis time, the removal
efficiency decreases due to excess coagulant species formation. Conclusions

From the present paper, the following conclusions could be drawn:

Shape of Electrode • The EC technique is one of the most novel and promising tech-
The shape of an electrode plays a vital role on metal removal effi- nologies to treat different types of wastewater including organ-
ciency during the electrochemical treatment process. The shape of ics and inorganics molecules contained in a variety of industrial
an electrode also depends upon the type of reactor used and the size effluents.
of ECR. It has been expected that perforated electrodes show higher • EC treatment is based on the srelease of metal ions from metal
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

metal removal as compared to the plane electrodes. A few authors electrode using direct current supply. These metal cations form
have reported the effect of the electrode shape on EC (Kabdaşlı metal hydroxide cations that participate in the coagulation
et al. 2009; Kuroda et al. 2003; Nielsen and Andersson 2009). process.
These authors have reported that the perforated electrode showed • The steps and mechanisms in EC involves: (1) electrolytic re-
higher metal removal efficiency with respect to the plain electrode. actions at the surface of electrodes and coagulants formation in
The intensity of the electric field at the corner edge of the perforated the aqueous phase by losses of electrode material; (2) hydrolysis
electrode was 1.2 times higher than the plain electrodes, which re- of dissolved anodic metal and its participation in coagulation;
sulted in an increase in output current in the perforated-type (3) adsorption/enmeshment of pollutants in metal hydroxide
electrode. flocks and its neutralisation; and (4) removal by electroflotation,
sedimentation, sweeping, and adhesion to bubbles.
• The gap found in the review process is that most of the studies
Arrangement of Electrode reported are on the treatment of synthetic wastewater using the
The role of the electrode material and the mode of connection are batch process; hence, more research work is needed on treat-
important parameters in the electrolysis process for optimizing the ment of real effluent and use of the continuous process. Very
cost. In the treatment of textile effluent, various modes of connec- few studies have been done on recovery of metals from sludge
tion have been used (Kobya et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2019). Authors formed during EC.
have used monopolar electrode with a parallel connection due to • During the treatment of wastewater, oxide film adheres to
which current was divided equally in all the electrodes in the indi- the surface of the electrode; therefore, periodic cleaning and
vidual cells. The parallel connection has been proved to be better in replacement of the electrode becomes challenging. This is
comparison to the series connections due to the lower potential dif- the main drawback/disadvantage of the process.
ference. In the series connection, all the electrodes are connected • Numerous technologies are available to treat different types
internally. In the bipolar connection, outer-side electrodes are con- of wastewater including coagulation/flocculation, adsorption,
nected to the external power supply source. In this type of arrange- membrane separation, and wet air oxidation. However, these
ment, there are no connections between the inner electrodes. conventional methods have several flaws: (1) the coagulation
process generates a huge volume of sludge and the total dis-
solved solids concentration in the effluent are at peak levels;
Future Scope (2) in the adsorption process, adsorbent regeneration is very
expensive as well as involves the loss of adsorbent; (3) in
This study demonstrates that electrochemical methods are an effec- membrane separation, the high cost of membranes and their
tive treatment process to treat different types of wastewater. For equipment, as well as less productivity due to fouling of the
successful industrial application of electrochemical treatment, membrane, is always encountered; and (4) wet air oxidation re-
quantitative scale-up from the batch laboratory scale is required. quires appropriate temperature and pressure, which causes se-
The detailed understanding and deep knowledge gained from vere operating conditions demands such as high capital cost
the batch process should be applied to the continuous process. associated with the installation operation and maintenance.
On the basis of the present studies, the following recommendations • The review also demonstrated that EC is an effective technique
are suggested for future research: to treat different wastewaters and applicable in effluent treat-
• The electrochemical method should be studied for industrial ment because: (1) it is cost-effective and easily operable as it
wastewaters. The mechanisms for metal cation removal are needs simple equipments and can be designed as per required
not well described. This gap should be bridged with the relevant capacity of the plant; (2) secondary pollutants are not generated
research in this direction. and no chemicals are required in this process, thus it is an eco-
• Cost-effective electrodes can be used to treat wastewater with friendly technique; (3) it needs a low current; therefore, it can be
the series and bipolar arrangement in both batch and continuous operated by green processes like solar and fuel cells; (4) it is also
electrochemical reactors. Study in this regard will be beneficial a useful technique in terms of lower quantity of sludge gener-
and can be compared for their adoption in EC treatment. ation as compared to other processes; and (5) in many processes,
• Since EC treatment is a single stage process, which is unable to it gave pollutants reduction up to 100%.
remove pollutants completely, it calls for further research to find
suitable posttreatment options, namely membrane separation
and/or adsorption to meet the stipulated regulatory discharge Data Availability Statement
standards of the effluents.
• During the EC process, adequate amounts of hydrogen gas is During the preparation of this paper, a large number of research
generated, and the composition of the gas needs to be analyzed. papers have been studied, which are incorporated in this paper

© ASCE 03120009-11 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 as terms of reference. All data, models, and code generated or used Behbahani, M., M. R. Alvi Moghaddam, and M. Arami. 2011a. “A com-
during the study appeared in the submitted paper. Furthermore, to parison between aluminum and iron electrodes on removal of phosphate
the best of our knowledge, any data in this paper are not incorpo- from aqueous solutions by electrocoagulation process.” Int. J. Environ.
rated from a hidden/other source. Res. 5 (2): 403–412. https://doi.org/10.22059/IJER.2011.325.
Behbahani, M., M. R. Alvi Moghaddam, and M. Arami. 2011b.
“Techno-economical evaluation of fluoride removal by electrocoagula-
tion process: Optimization through response surface methodology.”
References Desalination 271 (1–3): 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010
.12.033.
Adhoum, N., L. Monser, N. Bellakhal, and J. E. Belgaied. 2004. “Treat- Bektaş, N., H. Akbulut, H. Inan, and A. Dimoglo. 2004. “Removal of
ment of electroplating wastewater containing Cu2þ , Zn2þ and Cr(VI) by phosphate from aqueous solutions by electro-coagulation.” J. Hazard.
electrocoagulation.” J. Hazard. Mater. 112 (3): 207–213. https://doi.org Mater. 106 (2–3): 101–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2003.10
/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.04.018. .002.
Akbal, F., and S. Camcı. 2011. “Copper, chromium and nickel removal Bhagawan, D., S. Poodari, T. Pothuraju, D. Srinivasulu, G. Shankaraiah,
from metal plating wastewater by electrocoagulation.” Desalination M. Y. Rani, V. Himabindu, and S. Vidyavathi. 2014. “Effect of opera-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

269 (1–3): 214–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.11.001. tional parameters on heavy metal removal by electrocoagulation.”
Akyol, A. 2012. “Treatment of paint manufacturing wastewater by electro- Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21 (24): 14166–14173. https://doi.org/10
coagulation.” Desalination 285 (Jan): 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .1007/s11356-014-3331-8.
.desal.2011.09.039. Borgheei, S. M., J. Goodarzi, M. Mohseni, and A. Amouei. 2015.
Al Aji, B., Y. Yavuz, and A. S. Koparal. 2012. “Electrocoagulation of heavy “Efficiency of removing chromium from plating industry wastewater
metals containing model wastewater using monopolar iron electrodes.” using the electrocoagulation method.” Int. Arch. Health Sci. 2 (2):
Sep. Purif. Technol. 86 (Feb): 248–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j 83–87.
.seppur.2011.11.011.
Boroski, M., A. C. Rodrigues, J. C. Garcia, L. C. Sampaio, J. Nozaki, and
Albert, C. F. 1996. Advanced inorganic chemistry a comprehensive text.
N. Hioka. 2009. “Combined electrocoagulation and TiO2 photoassisted
2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
treatment applied to wastewater effluents from pharmaceutical and cos-
Ali, I., T. A. Khan, and M. Asim. 2011. “Removal of arsenic from water by
metic industries.” J. Hazard. Mater. 162 (1): 448–454. https://doi.org
electrocoagulation and electrodialysis techniques.” Sep. Purif. Rev.
/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.05.062.
40 (1): 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/15422119.2011.542738.
Budiyono, N., and S. Johari. 2010. “Study on treatment of slaughterhouse
AlJaberi, F. Y. 2018. “Studies of autocatalytic electrocoagulation reactor for
wastewater by electro-coagulation technique.” Int. J. Sci. Eng. 1 (1):
lead removal from simulated wastewater.” J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 6 (5):
25–28.
6069–6078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2018.09.032.
Can, O. T., M. Kobya, E. Demirbas, and M. Bayramoglu. 2006. “Treatment
Arroyo, M. G., V. Pérez-Herranz, M. T. Montanes, J. García-Antón, and
of the textile wastewater by combined electrocoagulation.” Chemo-
J. L. Guinon. 2009. “Effect of pH and chloride concentration on the
sphere 62 (2): 181–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005
removal of hexavalent chromium in a batch electrocoagulation reactor.”
.05.022.
J. Hazard. Mater. 169 (1–3): 1127–1133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
Central Pollution Control Board. 2011. Pollution control law. SERIES:
.jhazmat.2009.04.089.
Asaithambi, P., M. Susree, R. Saravanathamizhan, and M. Matheswaran. PCLS/02/2010. New Delhi, India: Central Pollution Control Board.
2012. “Ozone assisted electrocoagulation for the treatment of distillery Chafi, M., B. Gourich, A. H. Essadki, C. Vial, and A. Fabregat. 2011.
effluent.” Desalination 297 (Jul): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal “Comparison of electrocoagulation using iron and aluminium electro-
.2012.04.011. des with chemical coagulation for the removal of a highly soluble acid
Aswathy, P., R. Gandhimathi, S. T. Ramesh, and P. V. Nidheesh. 2016. dye.” Desalination 281 (Oct): 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal
“Removal of organics from bilge water by batch electrocoagulation .2011.08.004.
process.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 159 (Feb): 108–115. https://doi.org/10 Ching, H. W., T. S. Tanaka, and M. Elimelech. 1994. “Dynamics of
.1016/j.seppur.2016.01.001. coagulation of kaolin particles with ferric chloride.” Water Res. 28 (3):
Avsar, Y., U. Kurt, and T. Gonullu. 2007. “Comparison of classical 559–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(94)90007-8.
chemical and electrochemical processes for treating rose processing Dabrowski, A., Z. Hubicki, P. Podkościelny, and E. Robens. 2004.
wastewater.” J. Hazard. Mater. 148 (1–2): 340–345. https://doi.org/10 “Selective removal of the heavy metal ions from waters and industrial
.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.02.048. wastewaters by ion-exchange method.” Chemosphere 56 (2): 91–106.
Babu, R. R., N. S. Bhadrinarayana, K. M. M. S. Begum, and N. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.03.006.
Anantharaman. 2007. “Treatment of tannery wastewater by electrocoa- Daniel, R., Y. Anjaneyulu, and R. J. Krupadam. 2009. “Cr(VI) removal
gulation.” J. Univ. Chem. Technol. Metall. 42 (2): 201–206. from electroplating industrial effluents: A greener and cheaper method.”
Bani-Melhem, K., and E. Smith. 2012. “Grey water treatment by a continu- Zaštita Materijala 50 (1): 13–18.
ous process of an electrocoagulation unit and a submerged membrane Deghles, A., and U. Kurt. 2016. “Treatment of tannery wastewater by
bioreactor system.” Chem. Eng. J. 198-199 (Aug): 201–210. https://doi a hybrid electrocoagulation/electrodialysis process.” Chem. Eng. Pro-
.org/10.1016/j.cej.2012.05.065. cess. 104 (Jun): 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2016.02.009.
Barakat, M. A., and E. Schmidt. 2010. “Polymer-enhanced ultrafiltration Dermentzis, K., A. Christoforidis, and E. Valsamidou. 2011. “Removal of
process for heavy metals removal from industrial wastewater.” Desali- nickel, copper, zinc and chromium from synthetic and industrial waste-
nation 256 (1–3): 90–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.02.008. water by electrocoagulation.” Int. J. Environ. Sci. 1 (5): 697–710.
Barrera-Díaz, C., G. Roa-Morales, L. Ávila-Córdoba, T. Pavón-Silva, and Drouiche, N., S. Aoudj, M. Hecini, N. Ghaffour, H. Lounici, and N.
B. Bilyeu. 2006. “Electrochemical treatment applied to food-processing Mameri. 2009. “Study on the treatment of photovoltaic wastewater
industrial wastewater.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45 (1): 34–38. https://doi using electrocoagulation: Fluoride removal with aluminium electrodes-
.org/10.1021/ie050594k. Characteristics of products.” J. Hazard. Mater. 169 (1–3): 65–69.
Bassyouni, D. G., H. A. Hamad, E.-S. Z. El-Ashtoukhy, N. K. Amin, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.03.073.
and M. M. Abd El-Latif. 2017. “Comparative performance of anodic Drouiche, N., S. Aoudj, H. Lounici, M. Drouiche, T. Ouslimane, and
oxidation and electrocoagulation as clean process for electrocatalytic N. Ghaffour. 2012. “Fluoride removal from pretreated photovoltaic
degradation of diazo dye acid broom 14 in aqueous medium.” wastewater by electrocoagulation: An investigation of the effect of op-
J. Hazard. Mater. 335: 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat erational parameters.” Procedia Eng. 33: 385–391. https://doi.org/10
.2017.04.045. .1016/j.proeng.2012.01.1218.
Bayramoglu, M., M. Eyvaz, and M. Kobya. 2007. “Treatment of the textile Drouiche, N., N. Ghaffour, H. Lounici, and M. Mameri. 2007. “Electro-
wastewater by electrocoagulation: Economical evaluation.” Chem. Eng. coagulation of chemical mechanical polishing wastewater.” Desalina-
J. 128 (2–3): 155–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2006.10.008. tion 214 (1–3): 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.11.009.

© ASCE 03120009-12 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Dura, A., and C. B. Breslin. 2019. “Electrocoagulation using stainless steel bipolar electrode connections.” Chemosphere 73 (9): 1393–1400.
anodes: Simultaneous removal of phosphates, Orange II and zinc ions.” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.08.041.
J. Hazard. Mater. 374 (Jul): 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat Ghosh, D., C. R. Medhi, and M. K. Purkait. 2011. “Techno-economic
.2019.04.032. analysis for the electrocoagulation of fluoride-contaminated drinking
Durante, C., M. Cuscov, A. A. Isse, G. Sandonà, and A. Gennaro. 2011. water.” Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 93 (3): 424–437. https://doi.org/10
“Advanced oxidation processes coupled with electrocoagulation for the .1080/02772248.2010.542158.
exhaustive abatement of Cr-EDTA.” Water Res. 45 (5): 2122–2130. Golder, A. K., A. K. Chanda, A. N. Samanta, and S. Ray. 2007a. “Removal
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.12.022. of Cr (VI) from aqueous solution: Electrocoagulation vs chemical
Elabbas, S., N. Ouazzani, L. Mandi, F. Berrekhis, M. Perdicakis, S. coagulation.” Sep. Sci. Technol. 42 (10): 2177–2193. https://doi.org/10
Pontvianne, M. N. Pons, F. Lapicque, and J. P. Leclerc. 2016. “Treat- .1080/01496390701446464.
ment of highly concentrated tannery wastewater using electrocoagula- Golder, A. K., V. S. Dhaneesh, A. N. Samanta, and S. Ray. 2009. “Electro-
tion: Influence of the quality of aluminium used for the electrode.” treatment of industrial copper plating rinse effluent using mild steel
J. Hazard. Mater. 319 (Dec): 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat and aluminum electrodes.” J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 84 (12):
.2015.12.067. 1803–1810. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2249.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

El-Naas, M. H., S. Al-Zuhair, A. Al-Lobaney, and S. Makhlouf. 2009. Golder, A. K., A. N. Samanta, and S. Ray. 2007b. “Trivalent chromium
“Assessment of electrocoagulation for the treatment of petroleum refin- removal by electrocoagulation and characterization of the process
ery wastewater.” J. Environ. Manage. 91 (1): 180–185. https://doi.org sludge.” J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 82 (5): 496–503. https://doi
/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.08.003. .org/10.1002/jctb.1700.
Elnakar, H., and I. Buchanan. 2019. “Soluble chemical oxygen demand Gomes, J. A. G., et al. 2007. “Arsenic removal by electrocoagulation using
removal from bypass wastewater using iron electrocoagulation.” Sci. combined Al-Fe electrode system and characterization of products.”
Total Environ. 706 (Mar): 136076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv J. Hazard. Mater. 139 (2): 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat
.2019.136076. .2005.11.108.
Emamjomeh, M. M., and M. Sivakumar. 2006. “An empirical model for Gong, C., G. Shen, H. Huang, P. He, Z. Zhang, and B. Ma. 2017. “Removal
defluoridation by batch monopolar electrocoagulation/flotation (ECF) and transformation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons during electro-
process.” J. Hazard. Mater. 131 (1–3): 118–125. https://doi.org/10 coagulation treatment of an industrial wastewater.” Chemosphere
.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.09.030. 168 (Feb): 58–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.10.044.
Emamjomeh, M. M., and M. Sivakumar. 2009. “Fluoride removal by a con- Hanay, O., and H. Hasar. 2011. “Effect of anions on removing Cu2þ , Mn2þ
tinuous flow electrocoagulation reactor.” J. Environ. Manage. 90 (2): and Zn2þ in electrocoagulation process using aluminum electrodes.”
1204–1212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.06.001. J. Hazard. Mater. 189 (1–2): 572–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
Emamjomeh, M. M., M. Sivakumar, and A. S. Varyani. 2011. “Analysis .jhazmat.2011.02.073.
and the understanding of fluoride removal mechanisms by an Hassani, G., S. Nasseri, and H. Gharibi. 2011. “Removal of cyanide
electrocoagulation/flotation (ECF) process.” Desalination 275 (1–3): by electrocoagulation process.” Anal. Bioanal. Electrochem. 3 (6):
102–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.02.032. 625–634.
Ensano, B. M. B., L. Borea, V. Naddeo, V. Belgiorno, M. D. G. DeLuna, Heidmann, I., and W. Calmano. 2008. “Removal of Cr (VI) from model
and F. C. Ballesteros. 2017. “Removal of pharmaceuticals from waste- wastewaters by electrocoagulation with Fe electrodes.” Sep. Purif.
water by intermittent electrocoagulation.” Water 9 (2): 85. https://doi Technol. 61 (1): 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2007.09.011.
.org/10.3390/w9020085. Heidmann, I., and W. Calmano. 2010. “Removal of Ni, Cu and Cr from
Fajardo, A. S., R. F. Rodrigues, R. C. Martins, L. M. Castro, and R. M. a galvanic wastewater in an electrocoagulation system with Fe-and
Quinta-Ferreira. 2015. “Phenolic wastewaters treatment by electrocoa- Al-electrodes.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 71 (3): 308–314. https://doi.org/10
gulation process using Zn anode.” Chem. Eng. J. 275 (Sep): 331–341. .1016/j.seppur.2009.12.016.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.03.116. Hu, C. Y., S. L. Lo, and W. H. Kuan. 2003. “Effects of co-existing anions on
Farhadi, S., B. Aminzadeh, A. Torabian, V. Khatibikamal, and M. A. fluoride removal in electrocoagulation (EC) process using aluminum
Fard. 2012. “Comparison of COD removal from pharmaceutical electrodes.” Water Res. 37 (18): 4513–4523. https://doi.org/10.1016
wastewater by electrocoagulation, photoelectrocoagulation, peroxi- /S0043-1354(03)00378-6.
electrocoagulation and peroxi-photoelectrocoagulation processes.” Hunsom, M., K. Pruksathorn, S. Damronglerd, H. Vergnes, and P.
J. Hazard. Mater. 219–220 (Jun): 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Duverneuil. 2005. “Electrochemical treatment of heavy metals (Cu2þ ,
.jhazmat.2012.03.013. Cr6þ , Ni2þ ) from industrial effluent and modeling of copper reduction.”
Feng, D., C. Aldrich, and H. Tan. 2000. “Treatment of acid mine water by Water Res. 39 (4): 610–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.10
use of heavy metal precipitation and ion exchange.” Miner. Eng. 13 (6): .011.
623–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-6875(00)00045-5. Hussin, F., M. K. Aroua, and M. Szlachta. 2019. “Combined solar electro-
Feng, X., Z. Wu, and X. Chen. 2007. “Removal of metal ions from electro- coagulation and adsorption processes for Pb (II) removal from aqueous
plating effluent by EDI process and recycle of purified water.” Sep. solution.” Chem. Eng. Process. 143 (Sep): 107619. https://doi.org/10
Purif. Technol. 57 (2): 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur .1016/j.cep.2019.107619.
.2007.04.014. İrdemez, Ş., N. Demircioğlu, and Z. Bingül. 2006a. “The effects of current
Gatsios, E., J. N. Hahladakis, and E. Gidarakos. 2015. “Optimization density and phosphate concentration on phosphate removal from waste-
of electrocoagulation (EC) process for the purification of a real indus- water by electrocoagulation using aluminum and iron plate electrodes.”
trial wastewater from toxic metals.” J. Environ. Manage. 154 (May): Sep. Purif. Technol. 52 (2): 218–223.
117–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.02.018. İrdemez, Ş., Y. Ş. Yıldız, and V. Tosunoğlu. 2006b.“Optimization of phos-
Ghanbari, F., and M. Moradi. 2015. “A comparative study of electrocoagu- phate removal from wastewater by electrocoagulation with aluminum
lation, electrochemical Fenton, electro-Fenton and peroxi-coagulation plate electrode.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 52 (2): 394–401.
for decolorization of real textile wastewater: Electrical energy consump- Kabdaşlı, I., T. Arslan, T. Ölmez-Hancı, I. Arslan-Alaton, and O. Tünay.
tion and biodegradability improvement.” J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 3 (1): 2009. “Complexing agent and heavy metal removals from metal
499–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2014.12.018. plating effluent by electrocoagulation with stainless steel electrodes.”
Gherardini, L., P. A. Michaud, M. Panizza, C. Comninellis, and N. Vatistas. J. Hazard. Mater. 165 (1–3): 838–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
2001. “Electrochemical oxidation of 4-chlorophenol for wastewater .jhazmat.2008.10.065.
treatment: Definition of normalized current efficiency (ϕ).” J. Electro- Katal, R., and H. Pahlavanzadeh. 2011. “Influence of different combina-
chem. Soc. 148 (6): D78–D82. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.1368105. tions of aluminum and iron electrode on electrocoagulation efficiency:
Ghosh, D., C. R. Medhi, and M. K. Purkait. 2008. “Treatment of fluoride Application to the treatment of paper mill wastewater.” Desalination
containing drinking water by electrocoagulation using monopolar and 265 (1–3): 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.07.052.

© ASCE 03120009-13 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Keshmirizadeh, E., S. Yousefi, and M. K. Rofouei. 2011. “An investigation Lai, C. L., and S. H. Lin. 2003. “Electrocoagulation of chemical mechani-
on the new operational parameter effective in Cr(VI) removal efficiency: cal polishing (CMP) wastewater from semiconductor fabrication.”
A study on electrocoagulation by alternating pulse current.” J. Hazard. Chem. Eng. J. 95 (1–3): 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1385
Mater. 190 (1–3): 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03 -8947(03)00106-2.
.010. Lakshmanan, D., D. A. Clifford, and G. Samanta. 2010. “Comparative
Khandegar, V., and A. K. Saroha. 2013a. “Electrochemical treatment of study of arsenic removal by iron using electrocoagulation and chemical
effluent from small-scale dyeing unit.” Indian Chem. Eng. 55 (2): coagulation.” Water Res. 44 (19): 5641–5652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
112–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/00194506.2013.798889. .watres.2010.06.018.
Khandegar, V., and A. K. Saroha. 2013b. “Electrochemical treatment of Lakshmi, P. M., and P. Sivashanmugam. 2013. “Treatment of oil tanning
textile effluent containing Acid Red 131 dye.” J. Hazard. Toxic Radio- effluent by electrocoagulation: Influence of ultrasound and hybrid elec-
act. Waste 18 (1): 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153 trode on COD removal.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 116 (Sep): 378–384.
-5515.0000194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2013.05.026.
Khatibikamal, V., A. Torabian, F. Janpoor, and G. Hoshyaripour. 2010. Li, Y., X. Zeng, Y. Liu, S. Yan, Z. Hu, and Y. Ni. 2003. “Study on the
“Fluoride removal from industrial wastewater using electrocoagulation treatment of copper-electroplating wastewater by chemical trapping
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and its adsorption kinetics.” J. Hazard. Mater. 179 (1–3): 276–280. and flocculation.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 31 (1): 91–95. https://doi.org/10
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.02.089. .1016/S1383-5866(02)00162-4.
Kobya, M., O. T. Can, and M. Bayramoglu. 2003. “Treatment of textile Lin, S. H., and C. L. Wu. 1996. “Electrochemical removal of nitrite and
wastewaters by electrocoagulation using iron and aluminum electro- ammonia for aquaculture.” Water Res. 30 (3): 715–721. https://doi
des.” J. Hazard. Mater. 100 (1–3): 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1016 .org/10.1016/0043-1354(95)00208-1.
/S0304-3894(03)00102-X. Linares-Hernández, I., C. Barrera-Díaz, G. Roa-Morales, B. Bilyeu, and
Kobya, M., and E. Demirbas. 2015. “Evaluations of operating parameters F. Ureña-Núñez. 2009. “Influence of the anodic material on electrocoa-
on treatment of can manufacturing wastewater by electrocoagulation.” gulation performance.” Chem. Eng. J. 148 (1): 97–105. https://doi.org
J. Water Process Eng. 8 (Dec): 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe /10.1016/j.cej.2008.08.007.
.2015.09.006. López-Guzmán, M., M. T. Alarcón-Herrera, J. R. Irigoyen-Campuzano,
Kobya, M., E. Demirbas, A. Dedeli, and M. T. Sensoy. 2010. “Treatment L. A. Torres-Castañón, and L. Reynoso-Cuevas. 2019. “Simultaneous
of rinse water from zinc phosphate coating by batch and continuous removal of fluoride and arsenic from well water by electrocoagulation.”
electrocoagulation processes.” J. Hazard. Mater. 173 (1–3): 326–334. Sci. Total Environ. 678 (Aug): 181–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.08.092. .scitotenv.2019.04.400.
Kobya, M., H. Hiz, E. Senturk, C. Aydiner, and E. Demirbas. 2006a. Mahesh, S., B. Prasad, I. D. Mall, and I. M. Mishra. 2006. “Electrochemical
“Treatment of potato chips manufacturing wastewater by electrocoagu- degradation of pulp and paper mill wastewater. Part 1. COD and
lation.” Desalination 190 (1–3): 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j color removal.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45 (8): 2830–2839. https://doi
.desal.2005.10.006. .org/10.1021/ie0514096.
Kobya, M., E. Senturk, and M. Bayramoglu. 2006b. “Treatment of Mahvi, A. H., and E. Bazrafshan. 2007. “Removal of cadmium from
poultry slaughterhouse wastewaters by electrocoagulation.” J. Hazard. industrial effluents by electrocoagulation process using aluminum elec-
Mater. 133 (1–3): 172–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.10 trodes.” World Appl. Sci. J. 2 (1): 34–39.
.007. Malakootian, M., N. Yousefi, and A. Fatehizadeh. 2011. “Survey efficiency
Kobya, M., F. Ulu, U. Gebologlu, E. Demirbas, and M. S. Oncel. 2011. of electrocoagulation on nitrate removal from aqueous solution.”
“Treatment of potable water containing low concentration of arsenic Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 8 (1): 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1007
with electrocoagulation: Different connection modes and Fe-Al electro- /BF03326200.
des.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 77 (3): 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Mamelkina, M. A., S. Cotillas, E. Lacasa, C. Sáez, R. Tuunila, M.
.seppur.2010.12.018. Sillanpää, A. Häkkinen, and M. A. Rodrigo. 2017. “Removal of sulfate
Kongjao, S., S. Damronglerd, and M. Hunsom. 2008. “Simultaneous re- from mining waters by electrocoagulation.” Sep. Purif. Technol.
moval of organic and inorganic pollutants in tannery wastewater using 182 (Jul): 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.03.044.
electrocoagulation technique.” Korean J. Chem. Eng. 25 (4): 703–709. Mameri, N., A. R. Yeddou, H. Lounici, D. Belhocine, H. Grib, and
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-008-0115-1. B. Bariou. 1998. “Defluoridation of septentrional Sahara water of
Kryvoruchko, A., L. Yurlova, and B. Kornilovich. 2002. “Purification North Africa by electrocoagulation process using bipolar aluminium
of water containing heavy metals by chelating-enhanced ultrafiltration.” electrodes.” Water Res. 32 (5): 1604–1612. https://doi.org/10.1016
Desalination 144 (1–3): 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164 /S0043-1354(97)00357-6.
(02)00319-3. Manenti, D. R., A. N. Módenes, P. A. Soares, F. R. Espinoza-Quiñones,
Kumar, P., B. Prasad, and S. Chand. 2009. “Treatment of desizing waste- R. A. R. Boaventura, R. Bergamasco, and V. J. P. Vilar. 2014. “Assess-
water by catalytic thermal treatment and coagulation.” J. Hazard. ment of a multistage system based on electrocoagulation, solar photo-
Mater. 163 (1): 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.06 Fenton and biological oxidation processes for real textile wastewater
.114. treatment.” Chem. Eng. J. 252 (Sep): 120–130. https://doi.org/10
Kuroda, Y., Y. Kawada, T. Takahashi, Y. Ehara, T. Ito, A. Zukeran, Y. Kono, .1016/j.cej.2014.04.096.
and K. Yasumoto. 2003. “Effect of electrode shape on discharge current Manisankar, P., C. Rani, and S. Viswanathan. 2004. “Effect of halides in the
and performance with barrier discharge type electrostatic precipitator.” electrochemical treatment of distillery effluent.” Chemosphere 57 (8):
J. Electrostat. 57 (3–4): 407–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3886 961–966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.07.026.
(02)00177-8. Meas, Y., J. A. Ramirez, M. A. Villalon, and T. W. Chapman. 2010.
Lacasa, E., P. Canizares, C. Saez, F. J. Fernández, and M. A. Rodrigo. “Industrial wastewaters treated by electrocoagulation.” Electrochim.
2011a. “Electrochemical phosphates removal using iron and aluminium Acta 55 (27): 8165–8171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2010.05
electrodes.” Chem. Eng. J. 172 (1): 137–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .018.
.cej.2011.05.080. Modirshahla, N., M. A. Behnajady, and S. Mohammadi-Aghdam. 2008.
Lacasa, E., P. Canizares, C. Sáez, F. J. Fernández, and M. A. Rodrigo. “Investigation of the effect of different electrodes and their connections
2011b. “Removal of arsenic by iron and aluminium electrochemically on the removal efficiency of 4-nitrophenol from aqueous solution by
assisted coagulation.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 79 (1): 15–19. https://doi.org electrocoagulation.” J. Hazard. Mater. 154 (1–3): 778–786. https://doi
/10.1016/j.seppur.2011.03.005. .org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.120.
Lacasa, E., P. Cañizares, C. Sáez, F. J. Fernández, and M. A. Rodrigo. Moussavi, G., F. Majidi, and M. Farzadkia. 2011. “The influence of opera-
2011c. “Removal of nitrates from groundwater by electrocoagulation.” tional parameters on elimination of cyanide from wastewater using the
Chem. Eng. J. 171 (3): 1012–1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2011 electrocoagulation process.” Desalination 280 (1–3): 127–133. https://
.04.053. doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.06.052.

© ASCE 03120009-14 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Murugananthan, M., G. B. Raju, and S. Prabhakar. 2004. “Removal of sul- J. Membr. Sci. 208 (1–2): 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376
fide, sulfate and sulfite ions by electro coagulation.” J. Hazard. Mater. -7388(02)00263-6.
109 (1–3): 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2003.12.009. Reddithota, D., A. Yerramilli, and R. J. Krupadam. 2007. “Electrocoagu-
Muthukumar, M., M. Govindaraj, A. Muthusamy, and G. B. Raju. 2010. lation: A cleaner method for treatment of Cr (VI) from electroplating
“Comparative study of electrocoagulation and electrooxidation proc- industrial effluents.” Indian J. Chem. Technol. 14 (3): 240–245.
esses for the degradation of ellagic acid from aqueous solution.” Ribordy, P., C. Pulgarin, J. Kiwi, and P. Peringer. 1997. “Electrochemical
Sep. Sci. Technol. 46 (2): 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395 versus photochemical pretreatment of industrial wastewaters.” Water
.2010.505224. Sci. Technol. 35 (4): 293–302. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.1997.0141.
Myllymäki, P., R. Lahti, H. Romar, and U. Lassi. 2018. “Removal of total Ricordel, C., A. Darchen, and D. Hadjiev. 2010. “Electrocoagulation–
organic carbon from peat solution by hybrid method—Electrocoagulation electroflotation as a surface water treatment for industrial uses.”
combined with adsorption.” J. Water Process Eng. 24 (Aug): 56–62. Sep. Purif. Technol. 74 (3): 342–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2018.05.008. .2010.06.024.
Nazlabadi, E., M. R. A. Moghaddam, and E. Karamati-Niaragh. 2019. Sanyal, O., Z. Liu, B. M. Meharg, W. Liao, and I. Lee. 2015.
“Simultaneous removal of nitrate and nitrite using electrocoagulation/ “Development of polyelectrolyte multilayer membranes to reduce the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

floatation (ECF): A new multi-response optimization approach.” COD level of electrocoagulation treated high-strength wastewater.”
J. Environ. Manage. 250: 109489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman J. Membr. Sci. 496 (Dec): 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.2019.109489. .memsci.2015.09.011.
Nielsen, N. F., and C. Andersson. 2009. “Electrode shape and collector Semmens, M. J., C. D. Dillon, and C. Riley. 2001. “An evaluation of con-
plate spacing effects on ESP performance.” In Electrostatic precipita- tinuous electrodeionization as an in-line process for plating rinsewater
tion, 111–118. Berlin: Springer. recovery.” Environ. Prog. 20 (4): 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1002/ep
Nippatla, N., and L. Philip. 2019. “Electrocoagulation-floatation assisted .670200414.
pulsed power plasma technology for the complete mineralization of Şengil, İ. A., S. Kulac, and M. Özacar. 2009. “Treatment of tannery liming
potentially toxic dyes and real textile wastewater.” Process Saf. En- drum wastewater by electrocoagulation.” J. Hazard. Mater. 167 (1–3):
viron. 125 (May): 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.03 940–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.01.099.
.012. Sharma, D., Chaudhari, P. K., and A. K. Prajapati. 2020. “Removal of
Osipenko, V. D., and P. I. Pogorelyi. 1977. “Electrocoagulation neutraliza- chromium (VI) and lead from electroplating effluent using electrocoa-
tion of chromium containing effluent.” Metallurgist 21 (9): 628–630. gulation.” Sep. Sci. Technol. 55 (2): 321–331.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01083218. Sinha, R., I. Khazanchi, and S. Mathur. 2012. “Fluoride removal by a
Ouaissa, Y. A., M. Chabani, A. Amrane, and A. Bensmaili. 2012. continuous flow electrocoagulation reactor from groundwater of shiv-
“Integration of electro coagulation and adsorption for the treatment daspura.” Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2 (5): 1336–1341.
of tannery wastewater—The case of an Algerian factory, Rouiba.” Sridhar, R., V. Sivakumar, V. P. Immanuel, and J. P. Maran. 2011. “Treat-
Procedia Eng. 33: 98–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01 ment of pulp and paper industry bleaching effluent by electrocoagulant
.1181. process.” J. Hazard. Mater. 186 (2–3): 1495–1502. https://doi.org/10
Ozaki, H., K. Sharma, and W. Saktaywin. 2002. “Performance of an .1016/j.jhazmat.2010.12.028.
ultra-low-pressure reverse osmosis membrane (ULPROM) for separat- Tak, B. Y., B. S. Tak, Y. J. Kim, Y. J. Park, Y. H. Yoon, and G. H. Min.
ing heavy metal: Effects of interference parameters.” Desalination 2015. “Optimization of color and COD removal from livestock waste-
144 (1–3): 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(02)00329-6. water by electrocoagulation process: Application of Box–Behnken
Ozyonar, F., and B. Karagozoglu. 2015. “Treatment of pretreated coke design (BBD).” J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 28: 307–315.
wastewater by electrocoagulation and electrochemical peroxidation Tanattı, N. P., İ. A. Şengil, and A. Özdemir. 2018. “Optimizing
processes.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 150 (Aug): 268–277. https://doi.org/10 TOC and COD removal for the biodiesel wastewater by electrocoagu-
.1016/j.seppur.2015.07.011. lation.” Appl. Water Sci. 8 (2): 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-018
Parga, J. R., D. L. Cocke, J. L. Valenzuela, J. A. Gomes, M. Kesmez, G. -0701-2.
Irwin, H. Moreno, and M. Weir. 2005. “Arsenic removal via electrocoa- Tezcan Un, U., and E. Aytac. 2011. “Treatment of textile wastewaters by
gulation from heavy metal contaminated groundwater in La Comarca electrocoagulation method.” In Vol. 23 of Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. Chemi-
Lagunera Mexico.” J. Hazard. Mater. 124 (1–3): 247–254. https://doi cal Engineering Applications, 138–140. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia:
.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.05.017. International Institute of Engineers and Researchers.
Pociecha, M., and D. Lestan. 2010. “Using electrocoagulation for metal and Tian, Y., W. He, X. Zhu, W. Yang, N. Ren, and B. E. Logan. 2016. “Energy
chelant separation from washing solution after EDTA leaching of Pb, efficient electrocoagulation using an air-breathing cathode to remove
Zn and Cd contaminated soil.” J. Hazard. Mater. 174 (1–3): 670–678. nutrients from wastewater.” Chem. Eng. J. 292 (May): 308–314.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.09.103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.02.004.
Prajapati, A. K., M. Bidyut, and P. K. Chaudhari. 2013. “Electrochemical Tsioptsias, C., D. Petridis, N. Athanasakis, I. Lemonidis, A. Deligiannis,
treatment of rice grain based distillery effluent using iron electrode.” Int. and P. Samaras. 2015. “Post-treatment of molasses wastewater by elec-
J. Chemtech. Res. 5 (2): 694–698. trocoagulation and process optimization through response surface
Prajapati, A. K., and P. K. Chaudhari. 2014a. “Electrochemical treatment of analysis.” J. Environ. Manage. 164 (Dec): 104–113. https://doi.org/10
rice grain-based distillery biodigester effluent.” Chem. Eng. Technol. .1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.007.
37 (1): 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201300035. Tzanetakis, N., W. M. Taama, K. Scott, R. J. J. Jachuck, R. S. Slade, and
Prajapati, A. K., and P. K. Chaudhari. 2014b. “Electrochemical treatment J. Varcoe. 2003. “Comparative performance of ion exchange mem-
of rice grain-based distillery effluent: Chemical oxygen demand and branes for electrodialysis of nickel and cobalt.” Sep. Purif. Technol.
colour removal.” Environ. Technol. 35 (2): 242–249. https://doi.org/10 30 (2): 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5866(02)00139-9.
.1080/09593330.2013.824507. Vaikosen, E. N., and G. O. Alade. 2011. “Evaluation of pharmacognostical
Prajapati, A. K., P. K. Chaudhari, D. Pal, A. Chandrakar, and R. Choudhary. parameters and heavy metals in some locally manufactured herbal
2016. “Electrocoagulation treatment of rice grain based distillery drugs.” J. Chem. Pharm. Res. 3 (2): 88–97.
effluent using copper electrode.” J. Water Process Eng. 11 (Jun): 1–7. Valero, D., J. M. Ortiz, V. García, E. Expósito, V. Montiel, and A. Aldaz.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2016.03.008. 2011. “Electrocoagulation of wastewater from almond industry.”
Priya, M., and J. Jeyanthi. 2019. “Removal of COD, oil and grease from Chemosphere 84 (9): 1290–1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere
automobile wash water effluent using electrocoagulation technique.” .2011.05.032.
Microchem. J. 150 (Nov): 104070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc Vasudevan, S., and J. Lakshmi. 2011. “Effects of alternating and direct
.2019.104070. current in electrocoagulation process on the removal of cadmium from
Qin, J. J., M. N. Wai, M. H. Oo, and F. S. Wong. 2002. “A feasibility study water—A novel approach.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 80 (3): 643–651.
on the treatment and recycling of a wastewater from metal plating.” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2011.06.027.

© ASCE 03120009-15 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009

 Vasudevan, S., J. Lakshmi, J. Jayaraj, and G. Sozhan. 2009. “Remediation J. Hazard. Mater. 131 (1–3): 73–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
of phosphate-contaminated water by electrocoagulation with alumin- .jhazmat.2005.09.021.
ium, aluminium alloy and mild steel anodes.” J. Hazard. Mater. Zhang, F., C. Yang, H. Zhu, Y. Li, and W. Gui. 2019. “An integrated
164 (2–3): 1480–1486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.09.076. prediction model of heavy metal ion concentration for iron electrocoa-
Vasudevan, S., J. Lakshmi, and G. Sozhan. 2011. “Effects of alternating and gulation process.” Chem. Eng. J. 391 (Jul): 123628. https://doi.org/10
direct current in electrocoagulation process on the removal of cadmium .1016/j.cej.2019.123628.
from water.” J. Hazard. Mater. 192 (1): 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Zhao, S., G. Huang, G. Cheng, Y. Wang, and H. Fu. 2014. “Hardness, COD
.jhazmat.2011.04.081. and turbidity removals from produced water by electrocoagulation pre-
Vasudevan, S., J. Lakshmi, and G. Sozhan. 2013. “Electrochemically as- treatment prior to reverse osmosis membranes.” Desalination 344 (Jul):
sisted coagulation for the removal of boron from water using zinc 454–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.04.014.
anode.” Desalination 310 (Feb): 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j Zhao, X., B. Zhang, H. Liu, F. Chen, A. Li, and J. Qu. 2012. “Transfor-
.desal.2012.01.016. mation characteristics of refractory pollutants in plugboard wastewater
Verma, S. K., V. Khandegar, and A. K. Saroha. 2013. “Removal of chro- by an optimal electrocoagulation and electro-Fenton process.” Chemo-
mium from electroplating industry effluent using electrocoagulation.” sphere 87 (6): 631–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.01
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Birmingham on 07/22/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

J. Hazard. Toxic Radioact. Waste 17 (2): 146–152. https://doi.org/10 .054.

.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153-5515.0000170. Zhao, X., B. Zhang, H. Liu, and J. Qu. 2011. “Simultaneous removal of
Wang, C. T., W. L. Chou, and Y. M. Kuo. 2009. “Removal of COD arsenite and fluoride via an integrated electro-oxidation and electrocoa-
from laundry wastewater by electrocoagulation/electroflotation.” gulation process.” Chemosphere 83 (5): 726–729. https://doi.org/10
J. Hazard. Mater. 164 (1): 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat .1016/j.chemosphere.2011.01.055.
.2008.07.122. Zhou, M., Q. Dai, L. Lei, C. Ma, and D. Wang. 2005. “Long life modified
Wang, Y. H., S. H. Lin, and R. S. Juang. 2003. “Removal of heavy metal lead dioxide anode for organic wastewater treatment: Electrochemical
ions from aqueous solutions using various low-cost adsorbents.” J. Haz- characteristics and degradation mechanism.” Environ. Sci. Technol.
ard. Mater. 102 (2–3): 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894 39 (1): 363–370. https://doi.org/10.1021/es049313a.
(03)00218-8. Zhu, J., H. Zhao, and J. Ni. 2007. “Fluoride distribution in electrocoagu-
Xu, L., G. Cao, X. Xu, S. Liu, Z. Duan, C. He, Y. Wang, and Q. Huang. lation defluoridation process.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 56 (2): 184–191.
2017. “Simultaneous removal of cadmium, zinc and manganese using https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2007.01.030.
electrocoagulation: Influence of operating parameters and electrolyte Zielińska-Jurek, A., I. Wysocka, M. Janczarek, W. Stampor, and J. Hupka.
nature.” J. Environ. Manage. 204 (Pt 1): 394–403. https://doi.org/10 2015. “Preparation and characterization of Pt–N=TiO2 photocatalysts
.1016/j.jenvman.2017.09.020. and their efficiency in degradation of recalcitrant chemicals.” Sep. Purif.
Xu, X., and X. Zhu. 2004. “Treatment of refectory oily wastewater by Technol. 156 (2): 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2015.10
electro-coagulation process.” Chemosphere 56 (10): 889–894. https:// .024.
doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.05.003. Zodi, S., O. Potier, F. Lapicque, and J. P. Leclerc. 2009. “Treatment of the
Yang, C. L., and R. Dluhy. 2002. “Electrochemical generation of aluminum textile wastewaters by electrocoagulation: Effect of operating parame-
sorbent for fluoride adsorption.” J. Hazard. Mater. 94 (3): 239–252. ters on the sludge settling characteristics.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 69 (1):
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(02)00066-3. 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2009.06.028.
Yang, T., B. Qiao, G. C. Li, and Q. Y. Yang. 2015. “Improving performance Zongo, I., A. H. Maiga, J. Wéthé, G. Valentin, J. P. Leclerc, G. Paternotte,
of dynamic membrane assisted by electrocoagulation for treatment of and F. Lapicque. 2009. “Electrocoagulation for the treatment of textile
oily wastewater: Effect of electrolytic conditions.” Desalination wastewaters with Al or Fe electrodes: Compared variations of COD lev-
363 (May): 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.01.010. els, turbidity and absorbance.” J. Hazard. Mater. 169 (1–3): 70–76.
Yavuz, Y. 2007. “EC and EF processes for the treatment of alcohol distillery https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.03.072.
wastewater.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 53 (1): 135–140. https://doi.org/10 Zuo, Q., X. Chen, W. Li, and G. Chen. 2008. “Combined electrocoagula-
.1016/j.seppur.2006.08.022. tion and electroflotation for removal of fluoride from drinking water.”
Zaroual, Z., M. Azzi, N. Saib, and E. Chaînet. 2006. “Contribution to J. Hazard. Mater. 159 (2–3): 452–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat
the study of electrocoagulation mechanism in basic textile effluent.” .2008.02.039.

© ASCE 03120009-16 J. Environ. Eng.

J. Environ. Eng., 2020, 146(10): 03120009