4.5 Article

Investigations on Strategic Element Recovery by an Underground Membrane Pilot Plant from In-Situ Extracted Bioleaching Solutions

期刊

MINERALS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/min12010046

关键词

nanofiltration; microfiltration; bioleaching solution; downstream processing; strategic elements; in-situ leaching; pilot membrane plant; on site processing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extended studies have been conducted using Europe's first underground hybrid membrane pilot plant (TRL6) to selectively extract the critical raw materials indium and germanium from real bioleaching solutions. By introducing acidic-basic cleaning steps, it was found that the retention behavior could be kept at a constant level.
Focusing on the selective extraction of the critical raw materials indium and germanium from real bioleaching solutions, extended studies have been carried out using Europe's first underground hybrid membrane pilot plant (TRL6). In order to transfer former laboratory experiments to pilot scale, NF99 (Alfa Laval) was used for the evaluation of membrane permeance and ion retention. A performance test of microfiltration (MF) and nanofiltration (NF) showed high permeances with low root-mean-square deviation under feed variation (5.2% for MF, 4.7% for NF). Depending on the feed load, a significant permeance drop of up to 57% for MF (3 bar) and 26% for NF (10 bar, 1.1 m s(-1)) was observed. The NF retention performance showed that, without regular chemical cleaning, the selectivity between the target elements degraded. By introducing acidic-basic cleaning steps, it was possible to keep the retention behavior at an approximately constant level (In 91.0 +/- 1.3%; Ge 18.2 +/- 5.5%). In relation to the specified target, the best results could be achieved at low pressure (7.5 bar) and a maximum overflow velocity of 1.1 m s(-1), with a retention of 88.4% for indium and 8.8% for germanium. Moreover, the investigations proved the functionality and long-term stability of the underground membrane device.

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

4.5
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