4.8 Article

Energy breakdown in capacitive deionization

Journal

WATER RESEARCH
Volume 104, Issue -, Pages 303-311

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2016.08.020

Keywords

Capacitive deionization; Water desalination; Energy consumption; Porous carbon electrodes; Performance optimization

Funding

  1. LLNL LDRD project [15-ERD-068]
  2. TomKat Center for Sustainable Energy at Stanford University
  3. US DOE by LLNL [DE-AC52-07NA27344]
  4. Stanford Graduate Fellowship program of Stanford University
  5. TomKat Center for Sustainable Energy as part of the Distributed Production and Energy Generation program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We explored the energy loss mechanisms in capacitive deionization (CDI). We hypothesize that resistive and parasitic losses are two main sources of energy losses. We measured contribution from each loss mechanism in water desalination with constant current (CC) charge/discharge cycling. Resistive energy loss is expected to dominate in high current charging cases, as it increases approximately linearly with current for fixed charge transfer (resistive power loss scales as square of current and charging time scales as inverse of current). On the other hand, parasitic loss is dominant in low current cases, as the electrodes spend more time at higher voltages. We built a CDI cell with five electrode pairs and standard flow between architecture. We performed a series of experiments with various cycling currents and cut-off voltages (voltage at which current is reversed) and studied these energy losses. To this end, we measured series resistance of the cell (contact resistances, resistance of wires, and resistance of solution in spacers) during charging and discharging from voltage response of a small amplitude AC current signal added to the underlying cycling current. We performed a separate set of experiments to quantify parasitic (or leakage) current of the cell versus cell voltage. We then used these data to estimate parasitic losses under the assumption that leakage current is primarily voltage (and not current) dependent. Our results confirmed that resistive and parasitic losses respectively dominate in the limit of high and low currents. We also measured salt adsorption and report energy-normalized adsorbed salt (ENAS, energy loss per ion removed) and average salt adsorption rate (ASAR). We show a clear tradeoff between ASAR and ENAS and show that balancing these losses leads to optimal energy efficiency. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available