4.7 Review

Application of membrane separation processes in phosphorus recovery: A review

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 767, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144346

Keywords

Membrane separation process; Phosphorus recovery; Forward osmosis; Electrodialysis; Trace organics; Heavy metals

Funding

  1. Major Science and Technology Project of Water Pollution Control and Management in China [2017ZX07202004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The depletion of phosphorus resources and the excessive discharge of phosphorus into waste streams are contrasting issues that can be effectively addressed through membrane separation technologies for phosphorus recovery. Factors to consider in membrane separation processes include membrane fouling, energy consumption, and selectivity of toxic substances.
The depletion of phosphorus resources and the excess discharge of phosphorus into waste streams are contrasting problems. The key to solving both problems is to recover phosphorus from the waste streams. Current phosphorus recovery technologies require high phosphorus concentrations and lack the ability to separate toxic substances from recovered phosphorus products. Membrane separation processes such as nanofiltration. forward osmosis, and electrodialysis are examples of effective methods for solving some of these issues. In this paper, the mechanisms, performance, and influential factors affect phosphorus recovery from membrane separation are reviewed. Membrane fouling, energy consumption, and the selectivity of toxic substances in membrane separation processes were evaluated. This work will serve as a basis for future research and development of phosphorus recovery by membrane separation processes and as a response to the increasingly pressing issues of eutrophication and the growing depletion of phosphorus resources. (C) 2020 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