4.7 Article

Hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents for the direct leaching of nickel laterite ores: Selectivity and reusability investigations

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2023.125619

关键词

Deep eutectic solvent; Nickel laterite ore; Non-aqueous leaching

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The emergence of the battery society has led to a high demand for battery metals, resulting in a strain on their supply. This study introduces a novel technique using a hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent (DES) for leaching and recovering battery metals from low-grade nickel laterite ores. The DES enables selective leaching and recovery of the metals, offering a promising pathway for the extraction of critical battery metals.
The emergence of the battery society has resulted in an unprecedented strain on the supply of battery metals, such as nickel, cobalt, and manganese. Consequently, there is an urgent need to develop processing technology for low-grade nickel laterite ores, which are abundant in resources but challenging to process using conventional hydrometallurgy. In the present study, a hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent (DES) was employed for the first time to leach and recover battery metals from a nickel laterite ore. The DES, which was prepared by decanoic acid and trialkylmethylammonium chloride, was expected to regulate the coordination environment by limiting water and providing ligands for the target metals to be stabilized in the DES. As intended, this direct laterite leaching by the DES facilitated the selective leaching of battery metals with iron, while suppressing the leaching of magnesium and silicon which are primary impurities in the laterite ore. Furthermore, stripping and scrubbing of the metals from the DES enabled the selective recovery of battery metals from iron and even allowed for the repeated use of the DES for at least four cycles of the leaching. The proposed process offers a pathway to recover the critical battery metals from abundant magnesium-rich nickel laterite ores.

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