Advancements in combined electrocoagulation processes for sustainable wastewater treatment: A comprehensive review of mechanisms, performance, and emerging applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review explores the potential and challenges of combining electrochemical, especially electrocoagulation (EC) process, with various - wastewater treatment methods such as membranes, chemical treatments, biological methods, and oxidation processes to enhance pollutant removal and reduce costs. It emphasizes the advantages of using electrochemical processes as a pretreatment step, including increased volume and improved quality of permeate water, mitigation of membrane fouling, and lower environmental impact. Pilot-scale studies are discussed to validate the effectiveness of combined EC processes, particularly for industrial wastewater. Factors such as electrode materials, coating materials, and the integration of a third process are discussed as potential avenues for improving the environmental sustainability and cost-effectiveness of the combined EC processes. This review also discusses factors for improvement and explores the EC process combined with Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOP). The conclusion highlights the need for combined EC processes, which include reducing electrode consumption, evaluating energy efficiency, and conducting pilot-scale investigations under continuous flow conditions. Furthermore, it emphasizes future research on electrode materials and technology commercialization. Overall, this review underscores the importance of combined EC processes in meeting the demand for clean water resources and emphasizes the need for further optimization and implementation in industrial applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".