4.7 Article

A serial system of multi-stage reverse electrodialysis stacks for hydrogen production

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 251, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114932

关键词

Reverse electrodialysis; Hydrogen production; Energy efficiency; Membrane; Salinity gradient energy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52076026, 51606024, 51776029]
  2. Project of the Key Laboratory of Ocean Energy Utilization and Energy Conservation of Ministry of Education, China [LOEC-201904]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a serial system of multi-stage RED sacks was proposed to improve the energy efficiency and working performance of direct hydrogen production. Experimental results showed that reducing the working current while increasing the number of RED stacks improved both hydrogen production and power output significantly.
Salinity gradient energy is converted to hydrogen energy by integrating reverse electrodialysis (RED) and electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen. In this work, a serial system of multi-stage RED sacks is proposed to improve the energy efficiency and working performance of direct hydrogen production. The experimental results show that, compared with a single-stage system, the multi-stage RED stack system showed significant improvements in both hydrogen production and power output. Appropriately reducing the working current while increasing the number of RED stacks was beneficial to net power output and energy conversion. Total hydrogen production was almost unaffected when the number of RED stacks was large. Maximum energy conversion efficiency occurred at an optimal feed solution velocity. Under these conditions, the maximum net output power, total hydrogen production, and total energy-conversion efficiency were 2.06 W, 881.88 mL h(-1), and 7.74%, respectively. The results are of relevance to investigation of the thermal-energy-driven reverse-electrodialysis heat engine for hydrogen production.

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