4.7 Review

Unlocking the potential of metal-organic frameworks-based mixed matrix membranes for hydrogen separation and purification

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiec.2023.08.020

关键词

Metal-organic frameworks; Mixed matrix membrane; Membrane technology; Hydrogen separation; Energy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Membrane-based separation is a promising technology for low-energy hydrogen separation and purification. Metalorganic frameworks as fillers in mixed matrix membranes fabrication show great potential in enhancing membrane performance due to their uniform apertures, high porosities, large internal surface areas, and tunable functionalities.
Membrane-based separation is a promising technology for hydrogen separation and purification due to its low energy consumption. Conventional membranes, such as polymeric membranes, often suffer from permeability-selectivity trade-offs weakening their potential for challenging gas separations. Metalorganic frameworks (MOFs) with uniform apertures, high porosities, large internal surface areas, and tunable functionalities make them excellent fillers in mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) fabrication for hydrogen separation. This review evaluates current state-of-the-art MMMs performances, explores the challenges in MMMs fabrication, and discusses current strategies in MOF-based MMMs fabrication and modification aspects to enhance the membrane performance, specifically for H2/CO2, H2/CH4, and H2/ N2 separation. Moreover, the hydrogen separation performance of MOF-based MMMs at elevated temperatures and pressure and improvement in antiaging and antiplasticization properties are discussed in detail. The outlook and perspectives for MOF-based MMMs for hydrogen separation are also provided. This review offers insight into the potential of MOFs as porous fillers in MMMs fabrication for hydrogen separation application. (c) 2023 The Korean Society of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. Published by 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