4.8 Article

Desalination and Nanofiltration through Functionalized Laminar MoS2 Membranes

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 11, 期 11, 页码 11082-11090

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.7b05124

关键词

MoS2; filtration; desalination; membrane; functionalization; nanomaterials

资金

  1. Defence Threat Reduction Agency [HDTRA1-12-1-0013]
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK [EP/K016946/1, EP/L01548X/1, EP/M010619/1, EP/P009050/1]
  3. EPSRC [EP/K0169S4/1]
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/M010619/1, EP/P009050/1, EP/K016946/1, EP/K016954/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. EPSRC [EP/K016954/1, EP/K005014/1, EP/P009050/1, EP/M010619/1, EP/K016946/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laminar membranes of two-dimensional materials are excellent candidates for applications in water filtration due to the formation of nanocapillaries between individual crystals that can exhibit a molecular and ionic sieving effect, while allowing high water flux. This approach has been exemplified previously with graphene oxide, however these membranes suffer from swelling when exposed to liquid water, leading to low salt rejection and reducing their applicability for desalination applications. Here, we demonstrate that by producing thin (similar to 5 itm) laminar membranes of exfoliated molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) in a straightforward and scalable process, followed by a simple chemical functionalization step, we can efficiently reject similar to 99% of the ions commonly found in seawater, while maintaining water fluxes significantly higher (similar to 5 times) than those reported for graphene oxide membranes. These functionalized MoS2 membranes exhibit excellent long-term stability with no swelling and consequent decrease in ion rejection, when immersed in water for periods exceeding 6 months. Similar stability is observed when exposed to organic solvents, indicating that they are ideal for a variety of technologically important filtration applications.

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