4.7 Article

Novel membrane concept for internal pH control in electrodialysis of amino acids using a segmented bipolar membrane (sBPM)

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
卷 443, 期 -, 页码 219-226

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.04.045

关键词

Electrodialysis; Segmented bipolar membrane; Internal pH control; Amino acid; Enzymatic modification

资金

  1. Dutch Technology Foundation STW
  2. applied science division NWO
  3. FUMA-Tech GmbH
  4. ECN
  5. CCL
  6. Huntsman

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In electrodialysis of amino acids, pH-changes play an important role in terms of the efficiency of the process. Due to the zwitterionic character of amino acids, small pH changes may result in significant changes in the charge of the amino acids. This decreases either the recovery of the target ions or the product purity. An example of this is the separation of the modification product of serine (Ser) from ethanolamine (Etn) where the decrease in the pH in the feed compartment leads to a decrease in the product purity due to co-transport of alanine (Ala), that becomes charged at low pH. External pH control, like acid/base dosage or the use of a buffer, adds smaller ions that compete with the amino acids during the separation and decreases the process performance. Here we investigate the separation of Etn and Ala using electrodialysis with a segmented bipolar membrane (sBPM). The designed sBPM has both monopolar and bipolar areas. The transport of positively charged Etn at neutral pH is allowed through the monopolar areas without decreasing the separation performance. At the same time water splitting is enhanced at the bipolar areas keeping the pH constant during the experiment. This approach resulted in a recovery of 37% of Etn, while Ala was completely retained in the feed stream. These results show the strength of the concept of using a segmented bipolar membrane to combine ionic transport and water splitting to control the pH simultaneously. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据