Qualitative Assessment of PC88A and HBTA Extractants in Lithium Recovery Processes Using Solvent Extraction

IF 2.9 4区 工程技术 Q2 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Junhyung Seo, Thang Toan Vu, Seungu Cho, Jieun Cha, Yeongeun Choi, Daesung Song
{"title":"Qualitative Assessment of PC88A and HBTA Extractants in Lithium Recovery Processes Using Solvent Extraction","authors":"Junhyung Seo,&nbsp;Thang Toan Vu,&nbsp;Seungu Cho,&nbsp;Jieun Cha,&nbsp;Yeongeun Choi,&nbsp;Daesung Song","doi":"10.1007/s11814-024-00341-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study compares the solvent-extraction behavior of lithium (Li) using the cost-effective extractant PC88A (2-ethylhexyl phosphonic acid mono-2-ethylhexyl ester) and the more expensive extractant HBTA (4,4,4-Trifluoro-1-phenyl-1,3-butanedione). PC88A achieved an optimal extraction rate of 37.6% at pH 5.43, with a maximum rate of 41.4% at pH 7.80. It required six stages at a 5/1 O/A ratio (organic phase-to-aqueous phase ratio) for 98% extraction and three stages at a 15/1 ratio for 100% extraction. In contrast, HBTA showed an optimal extraction rate of 86.2% at pH 6.23 and a maximum rate of 92.9% at pH 11.95. HBTA achieved 100% extraction with three stages at a 1/1 O/A ratio and 98% with one stage at a 5/1 ratio. By applying McCabe–Thiele methods, this study figured out that to achieve a 98% lithium extraction rate at 5/1 of O/A ratio, PC88A requires 6 stages, whereas HBTA achieves the same extraction rate in just 1 stage. This result indicate that a sixfold difference in efficiency if these extractants used in the counter-current solvent-extraction process. These findings reveal HBTA’s striking superiority over PC88A in terms of efficiency. Future studies should include evaluations of equipment and extractant costs, and overall efficiency.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":684,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering","volume":"42 2","pages":"323 - 328"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11814-024-00341-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares the solvent-extraction behavior of lithium (Li) using the cost-effective extractant PC88A (2-ethylhexyl phosphonic acid mono-2-ethylhexyl ester) and the more expensive extractant HBTA (4,4,4-Trifluoro-1-phenyl-1,3-butanedione). PC88A achieved an optimal extraction rate of 37.6% at pH 5.43, with a maximum rate of 41.4% at pH 7.80. It required six stages at a 5/1 O/A ratio (organic phase-to-aqueous phase ratio) for 98% extraction and three stages at a 15/1 ratio for 100% extraction. In contrast, HBTA showed an optimal extraction rate of 86.2% at pH 6.23 and a maximum rate of 92.9% at pH 11.95. HBTA achieved 100% extraction with three stages at a 1/1 O/A ratio and 98% with one stage at a 5/1 ratio. By applying McCabe–Thiele methods, this study figured out that to achieve a 98% lithium extraction rate at 5/1 of O/A ratio, PC88A requires 6 stages, whereas HBTA achieves the same extraction rate in just 1 stage. This result indicate that a sixfold difference in efficiency if these extractants used in the counter-current solvent-extraction process. These findings reveal HBTA’s striking superiority over PC88A in terms of efficiency. Future studies should include evaluations of equipment and extractant costs, and overall efficiency.

Abstract Image

溶剂萃取锂回收工艺中PC88A和HBTA萃取剂的定性评价
本研究比较了低成本萃取剂PC88A(2-乙基己基膦酸单-2-乙基己基酯)和昂贵萃取剂HBTA(4,4,4-三氟-1-苯基-1,3-丁二酮)对锂(Li)的溶剂萃取行为。PC88A在pH 5.43时的最佳提取率为37.6%,在pH 7.80时的最大提取率为41.4%。98%的萃取需要6个萃取阶段,萃取比例为5/1(有机相与水相的比例),100%的萃取需要3个萃取阶段,萃取比例为15/1。HBTA在pH为6.23时的最佳提取率为86.2%,在pH为11.95时的最高提取率为92.9%。HBTA在1/1 O/ a比例下,三级萃取达到100%,在5/1比例下,一级萃取达到98%。本研究通过McCabe-Thiele方法计算出,在O/ a比为5/1的情况下,PC88A要达到98%的锂提取率需要6级,而HBTA只需1级即可达到相同的提取率。结果表明,如果在逆流溶剂萃取过程中使用这两种萃取剂,其萃取效率相差六倍。这些发现揭示了HBTA在效率方面明显优于PC88A。未来的研究应包括对设备和萃取剂成本以及总体效率的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering 工程技术-工程:化工
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
310
审稿时长
4.7 months
期刊介绍: The Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering provides a global forum for the dissemination of research in chemical engineering. The Journal publishes significant research results obtained in the Asia-Pacific region, and simultaneously introduces recent technical progress made in other areas of the world to this region. Submitted research papers must be of potential industrial significance and specifically concerned with chemical engineering. The editors will give preference to papers having a clearly stated practical scope and applicability in the areas of chemical engineering, and to those where new theoretical concepts are supported by new experimental details. The Journal also regularly publishes featured reviews on emerging and industrially important subjects of chemical engineering as well as selected papers presented at international conferences on the subjects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信