4.7 Article

The effects of pretreatment on nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membrane filtration for desalination of oil sands process-affected water

Journal

SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
Volume 81, Issue 3, Pages 418-428

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2011.08.016

Keywords

Pretreatment; Nanofiltration; Reverse osmosis; Desalination; Oil sands process-affected water

Funding

  1. Helmholtz Alberta Initiative (HAI)
  2. Alberta Institute for Water Research (AIWR)
  3. Canadian Oilsands Network for Research and Development (CONRAD)
  4. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oil sands process-affected water (OSPW) is largely produced from the oil sands operational process and requires the removal of toxicants for reuse. Nanofiltration (NF) and reverse osmosis (RO) membrane applications can be used to remove salt ions from OSPW. However, membrane treatments of OSPW are impeded by membrane fouling due to suspended solids; therefore, feed water must be pretreated to manage fouling. This research investigated NF and RU pretreatment methods such as coagulation-flocculation-sedimentation (CFS), with and without coagulant and coagulant aids. The optimal concentration of coagulant was verified by examining water turbidity and membrane surface zeta potential. The results show that membrane permeability was enhanced by the addition of coagulant and coagulant aids. Organic and oily constituents in OSPW increased the negative charge and hydrophobicity of the membrane, decreasing membrane performance. The flux recovery ratio was used to measure the effects of physical and chemical washing. Efficient chemical cleaning was achieved with 1 mM acid; flux recovery was achieved to 81% after cleaning. This study reveals that the pretreatment improves desalination of OSPW for both NF and RU membranes. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available