4.8 Article

Selectivity and Mass Transfer Limitations in Pressure-Retarded Osmosis at High Concentrations and Increased Operating Pressures

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 20, Pages 12551-12559

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b01317

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET 1232619, DGE-1122492]
  2. Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-e), U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AR0000306]
  3. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys
  4. Directorate For Engineering [1232619] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pressure-retarded osmosis (PRO) is a promising source of renewable energy when hypersaline brines and other high concentration solutions are used. However, membrane performance under conditions suitable for these solutions is poorly understood. In this work, we use a new method to characterize membranes under a variety of pressures and concentrations, including hydraulic pressures up to 48.3 bar and concentrations of up to 3 M NaCl. We find membrane selectivity decreases as the draw solution concentration is increased, with the salt permeability coefficient increasing by a factor of 2 when the draw concentration is changed from 0.6 to 3 M NaCl, even when the applied hydraulic pressure is maintained constant. Additionally, we find that significant pumping energy is required to overcome frictional pressure losses in the spacer-filled feed channel and achieve suitable mass transfer on the feed side of the membrane, especially at high operating pressures. For a meter-long module operating at 41 bar, we estimate feedwater will have to be pumped in at a pressure of at least 3 bar. Both the reduced selectivity and increased pumping energy requirements we observe in PRO will significantly diminish the obtainable net energy, highlighting important new challenges for development of systems utilizing hypersaline draw solutions.

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