BPM-和aem辅助电吸附对单级海水反渗透脱硼效果的比较研究

IF 8.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Jingyi Sun, Shikha Garg and T. David Waite*, 
{"title":"BPM-和aem辅助电吸附对单级海水反渗透脱硼效果的比较研究","authors":"Jingyi Sun,&nbsp;Shikha Garg and T. David Waite*,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acs.estlett.5c0024910.1021/acs.estlett.5c00249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Membrane-assisted electrosorption, particularly the utilization of anion exchange membrane (AEM)- and bipolar membrane (BPM)-assisted systems, has garnered increasing interest as an effective technology for boron removal from a single-stage reverse osmosis (RO) permeate. In this study, we systematically examine the key factors─supporting electrolyte composition, charging voltage, and discharging voltage─that impact boron removal performance in both setups, with the insights provided aiding both process optimization and full-scale application. Our results indicate that, while the BPM-assisted system operates at a relatively lower cell voltage and consumes approximately 67% the amount of the energy used by the AEM-assisted system, the requirement for additional salt for sufficient conductivity and water dissociation is impractical for removal of boron from the RO permeate. Furthermore, due to the high cost of BPMs, the overall operational cost of the BPM-assisted system is ∼5-fold higher than that of the AEM-assisted system. Our results further show that applying a reverse potential (−1 V) during discharge desorbs only ∼60–65% of the boron, suggesting that electrode/membrane replacement is needed to maintain activity. Overall, while membrane-assisted electrosorption shows promise for boron removal from RO permeate, significant advancements are needed for both configurations to improve boron removal rates, reduce electrode and membrane costs, and decrease energy demands.</p>","PeriodicalId":37,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.","volume":"12 5","pages":"677–683 677–683"},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critical Comparative Study of Boron Removal from Synthetic Single-Stage Seawater Reverse Osmosis Permeate by BPM- and AEM-Assisted Electrosorption\",\"authors\":\"Jingyi Sun,&nbsp;Shikha Garg and T. David Waite*,&nbsp;\",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acs.estlett.5c0024910.1021/acs.estlett.5c00249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Membrane-assisted electrosorption, particularly the utilization of anion exchange membrane (AEM)- and bipolar membrane (BPM)-assisted systems, has garnered increasing interest as an effective technology for boron removal from a single-stage reverse osmosis (RO) permeate. In this study, we systematically examine the key factors─supporting electrolyte composition, charging voltage, and discharging voltage─that impact boron removal performance in both setups, with the insights provided aiding both process optimization and full-scale application. Our results indicate that, while the BPM-assisted system operates at a relatively lower cell voltage and consumes approximately 67% the amount of the energy used by the AEM-assisted system, the requirement for additional salt for sufficient conductivity and water dissociation is impractical for removal of boron from the RO permeate. Furthermore, due to the high cost of BPMs, the overall operational cost of the BPM-assisted system is ∼5-fold higher than that of the AEM-assisted system. Our results further show that applying a reverse potential (−1 V) during discharge desorbs only ∼60–65% of the boron, suggesting that electrode/membrane replacement is needed to maintain activity. Overall, while membrane-assisted electrosorption shows promise for boron removal from RO permeate, significant advancements are needed for both configurations to improve boron removal rates, reduce electrode and membrane costs, and decrease energy demands.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.\",\"volume\":\"12 5\",\"pages\":\"677–683 677–683\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00249\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00249","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

膜辅助电吸附,特别是阴离子交换膜(AEM)和双极膜(BPM)辅助系统的利用,作为一种从单级反渗透(RO)渗透中去除硼的有效技术,已经引起了越来越多的关注。在这项研究中,我们系统地研究了影响两种装置中除硼性能的关键因素──支持电解质成分、充电电压和放电电压──并提供了有助于工艺优化和全面应用的见解。我们的研究结果表明,虽然bpm辅助系统在相对较低的电池电压下运行,并且消耗的能量约为aem辅助系统的67%,但对于去除RO渗透物中的硼来说,需要额外的盐来获得足够的电导率和水解离是不切实际的。此外,由于bpm的高成本,bpm辅助系统的总体运营成本比aem辅助系统高约5倍。我们的研究结果进一步表明,在放电过程中施加反向电位(−1 V)只能解吸~ 60-65%的硼,这表明需要更换电极/膜来保持活性。总的来说,虽然膜辅助电吸附技术有望从RO渗透液中去除硼,但这两种配置都需要取得重大进展,以提高硼的去除率,降低电极和膜的成本,并降低能源需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A Critical Comparative Study of Boron Removal from Synthetic Single-Stage Seawater Reverse Osmosis Permeate by BPM- and AEM-Assisted Electrosorption

A Critical Comparative Study of Boron Removal from Synthetic Single-Stage Seawater Reverse Osmosis Permeate by BPM- and AEM-Assisted Electrosorption

Membrane-assisted electrosorption, particularly the utilization of anion exchange membrane (AEM)- and bipolar membrane (BPM)-assisted systems, has garnered increasing interest as an effective technology for boron removal from a single-stage reverse osmosis (RO) permeate. In this study, we systematically examine the key factors─supporting electrolyte composition, charging voltage, and discharging voltage─that impact boron removal performance in both setups, with the insights provided aiding both process optimization and full-scale application. Our results indicate that, while the BPM-assisted system operates at a relatively lower cell voltage and consumes approximately 67% the amount of the energy used by the AEM-assisted system, the requirement for additional salt for sufficient conductivity and water dissociation is impractical for removal of boron from the RO permeate. Furthermore, due to the high cost of BPMs, the overall operational cost of the BPM-assisted system is ∼5-fold higher than that of the AEM-assisted system. Our results further show that applying a reverse potential (−1 V) during discharge desorbs only ∼60–65% of the boron, suggesting that electrode/membrane replacement is needed to maintain activity. Overall, while membrane-assisted electrosorption shows promise for boron removal from RO permeate, significant advancements are needed for both configurations to improve boron removal rates, reduce electrode and membrane costs, and decrease energy demands.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ.
Environmental Science & Technology Letters Environ. ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL SC-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
17.90
自引率
3.70%
发文量
163
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Technology Letters serves as an international forum for brief communications on experimental or theoretical results of exceptional timeliness in all aspects of environmental science, both pure and applied. Published as soon as accepted, these communications are summarized in monthly issues. Additionally, the journal features short reviews on emerging topics in environmental science and technology.
×
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