4.6 Article

Nanocellulose Dewatering and Drying: Current State and Future Perspectives

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 8, 期 26, 页码 9601-9615

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c01797

关键词

Nanocellulose; Dewatering; Drying; Cellulose nanofibrils; Cellulose nanocrystals

资金

  1. U.S. Endowment for Forestry Communities
  2. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technology Office of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC36-08GO28308]
  3. Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC
  4. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Advanced Manufacturing Office [DE-AC0500OR22725]
  5. UT-Battelle LLC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The knowledge base for nanocellulose (NC) has grown exponentially over the past two decades and continues to expand with the increasing number of potential applications demonstrated in the literature and the patent space. NC has multiple forms depending on the starting cellulose source and the specific process used to produce it. Its high degree of surface reactivity makes it an ideal support structure for a wide variety of functional groups, leading to the ability to engineer materials for very specific applications. However, removing water from an NC suspension, e.g., dewatering and drying, while retaining the nanoscale properties of the NC remains a significant challenge to successful commercialization of NC materials. Processes for dewatering and drying of NC are desirable because of the high transport costs of shipping dilute aqueous suspensions, as well as end-use application requirements. Therefore, the development of nondestructive, cost-effective, scalable, and environmentally friendly dewatering and drying processes is important for commercial deployment of NC applications. This review addresses the current state of published knowledge on NC dewatering and drying and identifies research gaps that could be further explored in a precompetitive context to accelerate commercialization.

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

4.6
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