4.8 Article

Effective ion sieving with Ti3C2Tx MXene membranes for production of drinking water from seawater

期刊

NATURE SUSTAINABILITY
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 296-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41893-020-0474-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [21536005, 51621001, 21506066, 21606086, 21861132013]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019TQ0101, 2019M662920]
  3. NSFC-DFG [GZ-678]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of the Guangdong Province [2014A030312007]
  5. Guangdong Natural Science Funds for Distinguished Young Scholar [2017A030306002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two-dimensional lamellar membranes for water purification are promising but suffer from swelling that reduces their ion sieving performance in water. This study reports easy-to-fabricate, non-swelling MXene membranes prepared by the intercalation of Al3+ ions that could be scalable. Traditional ways of producing drinking water from groundwater, water recycling and water conservation are not sufficient. Seawater desalination would close the gap but the main technology used is thermally driven multi-flash distillation, which is energy consuming and not sustainable. Stacking two-dimensional (2D) nanomaterials into lamellar membranes is a promising technique in the pursuit of both high selectivity and permeance in water desalination. However, 2D membranes tend to swell in water, and increasing their stability in aqueous solution is still challenging. Here, we report non-swelling, MXene membranes prepared by the intercalation of Al3+ ions. Swelling is prevented by strong interactions between Al3+ and oxygen functional groups terminating at the MXene surface. These membranes show excellent non-swelling stability in aqueous solutions up to 400 h and possess high rejection of NaCl (similar to 89.5-99.6%) with fast water fluxes (similar to 1.1-8.5 l m(-2) h(-1)). Such membranes can be easily fabricated by simple filtration and ion-intercalating methods, which holds promise for their scalability.

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

4.8
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