| Literature DB >> 34068870 |
Dennis Asante-Sackey1, Sudesh Rathilal1, Emmanuel Kweinor Tetteh1, Elorm Obotey Ezugbe1, Lingham V Pillay2.
Abstract
Membrane-based water purification technologies contribute significantly to water settings, where it is imperative to use low-cost energy sources to make the process economically and technically competitive for large-scale applications. Donnan membrane processes (DMPs) are driven by a potential gradient across an ion exchange membrane and have an advantage over fouling in conventional pressure driven membrane technologies, which are gaining attention. DMP is a removal, recovery and recycling technology that is commonly used for separation, purification and the concentrating of metals in different water and waste streams. In this study, the principle and application of DMP for sustainable wastewater treatment and prospects of chemical remediation are reviewed and discussed. In addition, the separation of dissolved metal ions in wastewater settings without the use of pressure driven gradients or external energy supply membrane technologies is highlighted. Furthermore, DMP distinctive configurations and operational factors are explored and the prospects of integrating them into the wastewater treatment plants are recommended.Entities:
Keywords: Donnan Dialysis; Donnan membrane process; ion exchange membranes; metal recovery
Year: 2021 PMID: 34068870 PMCID: PMC8153574 DOI: 10.3390/membranes11050358
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Advantages and disadvantages of selected metal removal technologies.
| Process | Advantages | Disadvantage | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional Ion exchange | Low cost, high selectivity, little or no use of organic solvents, regeneration capability | Resin regeneration requires chemical addition, poor quality products, long production cycle, finding suitable resin is a challenge, process is highly pH sensitive. | [ |
| Pressure driven membranes | Wide range application, simple configuration, high removal and rejection. | Susceptible to fouling, complex reverse cleaning process, additional pretreatment process is costly, internal and external concentration polarization depending on membrane process, expensive and non-recyclable drawing solutions for forward osmosis process, enrichment of contaminant in retentates causing secondary pollution, non-rejection of monovalent ions for nanofiltration, high energy demand for pressure pumps used. | [ |
| Adsorption | Simple technology, wide range of metals selectivity, low cost local, materials readily available as natural absorbents, | High cost of absorbent, residue generation and disposal challenges, adsorbent regeneration complex and expensive, pH of solution affects sorption to binding sites, removal efficiency depends on type of sorbent, synthetic absorbent expensive to produce. | [ |
| Chemical precipitation | Simple, low cost of precipitant, non-selective, shorter removal time. | pH adjustment is critical as precipitates can resolubilize, high residue generation and disposal, high chemical demand, large tanks at high installation costs, energy inputs required, generation of H2S for sulfide reagent, CO2 for carbonate reagent. | [ |
| Bioremediation | Moderate cost, no waste generation, minimum or no disturbance to the soil, no ecosystem disruption, minimal energy requirement, large contaminants handled at a time. | Not recommended for non-biodegradable compounds, products after biodegradation can be more toxic, problematic upgrading from laboratory scale, contaminant migration through environmental resources, time consuming process, remobilization of stabilized contaminants due to changes in hydrological and geochemical conditions, inadequate benchmark values for field application, requires deep understanding of microbial process. | [ |
| ED/reverse ED | Ion transport is rapid, effective in wide pH ranges, no phase change, not affected by osmotic pressure. | Stack clogging and membrane fouling, high energy consumption, skilled labor, compatibility of membrane and stacks materials to feed stream solution is highly required, current density limit, requires post treatment and pretreatment. | [ |
Figure 1Categorized ion exchange membranes. (a) Positive or Negatively charged monopolar IEM, (b) Amphoteric IEM, (c) Bipolar IEM and (d) Mosaic IEM adapted from [49,50].
Figure 2Ions pathway through a homogeneous CEM (a) and heterogeneous AEM (b).
Figure 3Donnan Membrane Process Cell Designs: (a) a simple compartment with compressed air agitation; (b) Compartment with external vessels and a mixing unit; (c) Point of Use systems; (d) Donnan membrane rig.
Figure 4Al3+-H+ transport through a cation exchange membrane.
Commercially available Nafion membranes with their respective properties.
| Nafion | Formation | Equivalent Weight (g eq−1) | Nominal Thickness (µm) | Basic Weight (g m−2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N 115 | Extrusion | 1100 | 127 | 250 |
| N 117 | 1100 | 178–183 | 360 | |
| N 1035 | 1000 | 89 | 175 | |
| NR 212 | Solution casted | 1100 | 50–51 | 100 |
| NR 211 | 1100 | 25.4 | 50 | |
| XL | Reinforced | 1100 | 27.5 | 55 |
| HP | - | 20 | 43.5 | |
| 424 | 1100 | 180 | 540 | |
| 1110 | Extrusion | 1100 | 254 | 500 |
Target metal ion recovery using DMP only.
| Metal | Stream | Phase Conditions | IEM | Highlights | Reference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volume | Donor | Sweep | |||||
| Al3+ | PWTR | 4:1 | 3–3.5 | 1–2 M H2SO4 | Nafion 117 (HM) | %R (Al3+) Ionac was 55% < %R (Al3+) Nafion 117. | [ |
| Ti4+, Fe3+, Al3+, Na+ | Bauxite waste | - | 0.7–0.1 | 0.05–1 M HCl | Neosepta CMB (HM) | Fluxes for all membranes follow the order Fe3+ > Al3+ > Na+ > Ti4+. | [ |
| Au+ | Circuit board scrap | 1:1 | 0.84 | 0.1–4 M NaCl | Micro-pore grafted CEM | %R (Au) = 89% Au with trace transport of Cu and Ni despite being in high mass ratio in the donor phase after 4 cycles of treatment. | [ |
| Fe3+ | PWTR | 2:1 | 3–3.5 | 1 M H2SO4 | Nafion 117 (HM) | %R (Fe) = 82% at 2:1 against %R (Fe) = 76% at 4:1. | [ |
| Ca2+ and Mg2+ | PWTR | 1:1 | - | 0.02 M HCl | Nafion 117 (HM) | %R (Ca2+) = 20% and | [ |
| Ca2+ and Mg2+ | Tap water | - | 6.8–7 | 0.1 M HCl | Four Modified PVDF membrane | %R (Mg2+) = 80% and %R (Ca2+) = 70–72%. | [ |
| Cu2+ and Ag3+ | SS | 2–10:1 | - | 1–3 M HNO3 | Selemion CMV (HT) | Fluxes for Cu2+ > Ag3+. | [ |
| Cu2+, Co2+ and Ni2+ | SS | 2:1 | - | 0.01 M H2SO4 (pH 1–4) | ICE 450-SA3T (HT) | Flux of metal ions decreases with increasing pH of sweep solution for ICE membranes and vice versa for spectrapor. | [ |
| Cr3+ and Cu2+ | SS | - | 3 | 0.1 M HCl | Four different PVDF/P2FAn composite membrane synthesized with dopants | Flux and recovery of Cu is higher than Cr due to smaller hydration volume. | [ |
Toluenesulfonate, NSA—1,3 (6 or 7)-naphthalene trisulfonic acid; ABS—o-aminobenzen sulfonic acid; SDS—sodium dodecyl sulfate; P2Fan—poly2-fluoroaniline; SS—synthetic solution; PWTR—Potable water treatment residue.
Donnan membrane process and other treatment technologies.
| Combined Process | Target | Feed Phase | Comments | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electrodialysis | Ca2+ and Mg2+ | Brackish solution | Desalination increased by 21% with observed reduction in energy consumption after 79–89% Ca2+ and 75–90% Mg2+. | [ |
| Reverse electrodialysis | Ca2+ and Mg2+ | River and sea water | Gross and net power density improved by 1.4–9% and 6.3%, respectively. | [ |
| Reverse Osmosis | Ca2+ and Mg2+ | Potato Processing waste water and Tap water | DMP increases RO treatment by 16% and 47% more for wastewater and tap water. | [ |
| Struvite | Zn2+, K+, Na+, Mg2+ and Fe3+ | Hydrolyzed sludge liquid | Struvite composition met regulatory requirement as DMP recovery of metal composition was high. | [ |