4.8 Article

Integration of gas-liquid membrane contactors into anaerobic digestion as a promising route to reduce uncontrolled greenhouse gas (CH4/CO2) emissions

Journal

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 364, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128072

Keywords

Dissolved gases; Effluent treatment; Membrane separation; PDMS; Gas-liquid; Separation; Biogas recovery

Funding

  1. National Research, Development and Innovation Office of Hungary [OTKA K 138232]
  2. Recovery and Resilience Facility of the European Union [RRF-2.3.1-21-2022-00009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research studied the recovery of dissolved biogas from synthetic anaerobic effluents using PDMS hollow-fiber gas-liquid membrane contactors. The study showed that the liquid flow rate favors CH4 transport, while the sweep gas flow rate is more preferable for CO2 transport. The methane recovery could be improved under steady-state conditions.
In this research, the recovery of dissolved biogas (CO2/CH4) from synthetic anaerobic effluents was studied using non-porous, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), hollow-fibre gas-liquid membrane contactors towards the design of a reduced carbon-footprint integrated bioprocess. As a key parameter, the gas-to-liquid (G/L) ratio (employing argon as sweep gas) was systematically varied in the range of 0.5-2.0. The results showed on a 1 m2 PDMS module that increasing the liquid (effluent) flow rate favours the CH4 transport, while a higher sweep gas flow rate is preferable for the CO2 transport over CH4. Depending on the actual biogas composition and the CO2 content of the effluent, the methane recovery could be improved up to 63 % under steady-state conditions. In general, similar tendencies were observed when another PDMS membrane module with a smaller surface area (2500 cm(2)) was applied hence, in this sense, the separation behaviour seems to be independent of the membrane size.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available