| Literature DB >> 35294688 |
Mohamed Abdelgaied1, Mohamed Fathi Seleem2, Mohamed Mahgoub Bassuoni2.
Abstract
Freshwater and energy are critical components for the growth and progress of societies. The scarcity of freshwater and rapid population growth, especially in remote countries, has led to an urgent need to develop desalination technologies in order to raise its productivity and reduce its energy consumption rates. Membrane distillation is one of the effective methods characterized by its high productivity, but its disadvantage by higher electricity consumption. Also, solar stills are one of the sustainable and economical technologies, but the disadvantage by lower productivity. Accordingly, this manuscript dealt with a comprehensive review and detailed comparison of the most important modifications and innovations that were made to the design of the membrane distillation units, which aim to reduce electricity consumption rates, as well as the design of solar stills, which aims to maximize the productivity and efficiency. This was done by providing a detailed comparison of the most important three axes of modifications and innovations that were addressed by recent previous studies on the design of membrane distillation units and solar stills, and their statement as follows: preheating technology, use of the thermal storage materials, and nanomaterials technology. Finally, based on this review, the authors make some recommendations for future work in the field of solar and membrane desalination.Entities:
Keywords: Membrane distillation; Nanomaterials; Performance improvement; Preheating technology; Solar stills; Thermal storage mediums
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35294688 PMCID: PMC9120123 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-19625-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 5.190
Fig. 1Heat transfer mechanisms in direct contact membrane distillation system
Fig. 2Layout of solar-driven membrane distillation (Shafieian and Khiadani 2019)
Fig. 3Schematic of direct contact membrane distillation assisted by solar energy (Elzahaby et al. 2016)
Recent studies on the performance of membrane distillation systems using feed water preheating systems
| Refs | Nature | Improvement-techniques | Results | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shafieian et al. ( | Experimental + Simulation | Feed preheating using electric heater | Permeate water increase by 52 g/m2 min for increasing feed temperature from 30 to 60 °C | It is more efficient to heat the feed water stream to improve water productivity than to use the same amount of energy to cool the permeate stream |
| Shafieian and Khiadani ( | Experimental | Feed preheating using evacuated tube solar water collector + Electrical heater | • Permeate water productivity reached 3.81 L/m2 h with cooling unit • Maximum thermal efficiency of the solar system reached 78% • Exergy efficiency varying between 4 and 5% • Overall system efficiency improved from 46.6 to 61.8% for using the cooling unit in the permeate flow loop • Solar working fluid temperature varying between 37 and 58 °C | Except 15 min in the morning, the heat pipe solar collector was able to operate the desalination system independently without any additional required thermal energy |
| Elminshawy et al. ( | Experimental + Simulation | Electric heater + V-trough solar concentrator PV panels with cooling + Buried water heat exchanger | For feed water of 80 | The hybrid system has the capacity to produce 19.58 m3 of freshwater per year at a cost of 22.48 $/m3 and to reduce CO2 emissions by 136.82 kg |
| Wang et al. ( | Experimental | Solar PV with thermal recovery integrated with MD | Pure water productivity reached 3.25 kg/m2.h for utilizing 5-stage MD integrated with PV | This device can transform an electric power plant from a water consumer to a pure water producer |
| Ding et al. ( | Experimental + Simulation | Feed preheating using evacuated tube solar water collector | About 23.5 l/h average water productivity for 0.8 l/min feed flow rate and feed temperature 70 °C | - |
| Elzahaby et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Feed preheating using evacuated tube solar water collector + Electrical heater | • The daily productivity of pure water reaches 40.587 kg/day for 20 L/min feed flow rate and feed temperature 70 °C • Daily efficiency and Gain output ratio reached 60.06% and 0.624 | - |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Feed preheating using evacuated glass tube solar water collector + Evaporative cooler | • Maximum productivity reached 33.55 L/day • System efficiency reached 49.01% and gain output ratio reached 0.49 • Feed temperature ranged 55–70 °C | Use of the cooling unit on permeate flow loop improved the system productivity almost 1.25 |
| Soomro and Kimc (2018) | Theoretical | Solar power tower plant to produce the electricity and preheated the seawater before supplied to MD | • The maximum permeate flux 29.05 kg/ • The average freshwater produced up to 40,759 L/day • Estimated water cost 0.392 $/m3 | • Increasing the feed temperature increased the permeate flux • The effect of the feed flow rate is not significant compared to permeate flow rate |
| Siefan et al. ( | Experimental | Feed preheating using flat plate solar collector + Solar-powered PV collectors | • Solar powered was a better option for membrane distillation in terms of an environmental footprint | - |
| Sandid et al. ( | Experimental and simulation | Feed preheating using flat plate and evacuated tube collectors + electric heater | • The specific thermal energy consumption ranged from 158.83 to 346.55 kWh/m3 • The hot feed inlet temperature ranged 50–65 °C • The maximum gain output ratio reaches 4.4 • Thermal efficiency reached 72% • Cost of fresh drinking water reached 14.73 $/m3 | Using solar energy reduces carbon dioxide emissions by 7274.45 kg/year |
| Chang et al. ( | Practicality | Feed preheating using evacuated tube solar collector | Permeate flux reached 5.2 kg/m2 h at feed temperature 52 °C | This system is very effective for remote areas and especially for coastal fishery communities |
| Usman et al. ( | Economic feasibility | Feed preheating using thermal solar collector and waste heat recovery | • Increase the membrane permeability for using solar-thermal and waste heat • Reduced the rate of external power required to operate the system from 40 to 60% • Decreased water price from 6.80 $/m3 (the cost of operating the system with the electricity only) to only 1.6 $/m3 | The contribution of solar heat and waste heat used in the operation of the process leads to a lower cost of water production as well as making the desalination system more competitive, sustainable and economically viable for small and remote applications |
| Gustafson et al. ( | Theoretical | Waste heat + Chiller | Permeate water flux reached 22.9 L/m2 h at feed inlet temperature 64 °C and distillate temperature of 30 °C | Membrane productivity depends strongly on waste heat source characteristics |
| Abdelkader et al. ( | Experimental | Electrical heater | Permeate flux reached 13 kg/m2 h at a water temperature difference of 30 °C | - |
Fig. 4Test rig of solar-powered membrane distillation with energy storage mediums (Abdelgaied et al. 2020)
Recent studies on the performance of membrane distillation systems using heat storage materials
| Ref | Nature | Improvement-techniques | Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abdelgaied et al. ( | Experimental | Evacuated tube solar collector + Paraffin wax as energy storage materials (Solid/liquid heat capacity 2.95/2.51 kJ/kg °C) + Evaporative cooling | • For utilizing the Paraffin wax as energy storage materials, the productivity will be improved by a rate varying between 33.11 and 43.18% compared to cases without storage materials • GOR for a solar TDCMD with EC reached 0.93. While adding the Paraffin wax increases the GOR to 1.25 |
| Chafidz et al. ( | Experimental | Evacuated tube solar collector + Thermal storage tank contains hot water + heat pump driven by PV cell | 15.39 L/h average productivity with feed temperature of 69 °C |
| Chang et al. ( | Theoretical | Flat plate solar collector + Thermal storage tank contains hot water | 0.12 kg water productivity in 6 h |
| Gustafson et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Waste heat + Chiller + Thermal storage tank contains hot water | The higher water flux occurs when the waste heat source is on because it stores a greater quantity of heat at a faster rate |
| Kim et al. ( | Theoretical | Feed preheating using flat plate and evacuated tube collectors + Thermal storage tank with phase change materials (Sodium alum (NaAl(SO4)2·12H2O) with heat capacity of 181 kJ/kg) with 28-stage vacuum membrane distillation | • Gain output ratio of 28-stage system reached 47% • System performance improved with increasing number of stage • The produced fresh water cost reached 0.97 $/m3 |
Recent studies on the performance of membrane distillation systems using carbon-based nanomaterials
| Reference | Material | Operating conditions | Results | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wimalasiri and Zou ( | SW-CNT/graphene nanosheets for CDI electrodes | 25 ml/min feed flow, 780 mg/L NaCl aqueous solution, 25 °C, 2 V voltage | 98% salt removal efficiency | - |
| Baek et al. ( | VA CNT + Epoxy | 2–10 bar, 10–30 °C, with 600 rpm stirring speed, and 200 mg/L polyethylene oxide (PEO) | 1100 ± 130 L/h.m2.bar. water flux and the PEO rejection of the VACNT membrane as examined was 78% | Membrane size Avg pore diameter (nm) 4.8 ± 0.9 Pore density(#/cm2) 6.8*1010 |
| Dumée et al. ( | MD with 50 mg/m2 MW-CNT Matrix | Deionized water on cold side of MD, 35 g/L NaCl solution on hot side | 99% salt rejection and 12 kg/ | Water flux rate about 40 kg/m2.h at 28 kPa (Hot: 70 °C; Cold: 5 °C) |
| Li et al. ( | CNT/PES | 60 Psi | VA-CNTs water transportation was 3 times the CNT/PES membrane and 10 times higher than the pure PES membrane under the same pressure | - |
| Shawky et al. ( | Nanocomposite of MW-CNT/polyamide (15 mg MW-CNT/g PA) | NaCl Aqueous solution (4000 ppm) at room temperature, 3.9 MPa | 76 ± 1.1% salt rejection, 28 ± 0.8 L/h.m2.bar. Flux | - |
| Lee et al. ( | CNT | pressure at 1 bar | The water permeability through CNT millimeter thick UF membrane was 30,000 L/m2.h.bar | - |
| Bhadra et al. ( | Carboxylated CNTs (MWCNT-COOH/PVDF) | 24 mL/min feed flow rate, 3.4 wt.% NaCl solutions, 1 L/min dry air, 60–90 °C | 19.2 kg/h.m2 Productivity 99% salt rejection | The flow remained constant as the salt concentration increased, reaching 19.2 kg/h m2 |
| Yan et al. ( | (0.4 SW-CNT/PANI) | NaCl solutions with an initial conductivity of 100 μS/cm, 20 ml/min feed flow, 1.2 V | The salt removal efficiency is 78.4% Regeneration rate of 100% for 0.4 SWCNT/PANI | |
| Wang et al. ( | CNT/Polypryrrole Electrodes | 100 μS/mm NaCl aqueous solution | Saturated adsorption capacity was 96% and 43.99 mg/g for reactivation rate | - |
| Amini et al. ( | 0.1% MW – polyamide/CNT | 10 mM feed NaCl aqueous solution, 2 M NaCl draw solution, 23 °C, 240 kPa | 96.7 L/h m2 water flux nearly 160% higher than TFC membrane | - |
| Park et al. ( | VA-CNT | The pure water permeabilities for the VA-CNT membrane 1000 ± 100 L/m2.h.bar | - | |
| Zhao et al. ( | 0.1% MW-polyamide/CNT | NaCl Aqueous solution (2000 ppm, 7 pH, 25 °C), 16 bars | 28.05 L/h.m2 water flux and 90% salt rejection | With increase in the amount of MWNTs in the membrane, the water flux increased from 14.86 to 28.05 L/m2.h while the salt rejection decreased slightly |
| Jia et al. ( | CNT Forward osmosis | 0.58 M NaCl aqueous solution (feed), 1 atm, and 300 K | 100%-salt rejection for different sized CNTs | Water flux possessed by the CNT membranes tends to increase at first and then decrease with the increase of the CNT diameter in the investigating range |
Recent studies on the performance of membrane distillation systems using nano-zeolite
| Reference | Material | Operating conditions | Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anis et al. ( | Nano-zeolite | 25 bars, 25,000 mg/L NaCl solution | For 0.5 wt.% nano zeolite: A salt rejection of 99.52% with a flux increase of 34.2% |
| Liu and Chen ( | Nano-zeolite | Aqueous NaCl (with initial NaCl concentration of 1 mol/L | 100% rejection of salt, the permeability is about 2 × |
| Kim et al. ( | Nano-zeolite | - | 98.8% Salt rejection and 37.8 L/ m2.h water flux |
Fig. 5A solar still coupled with solar collector (Badran and Al-Tahaineh 2005)
Fig. 6Layout of hybrid humidification-dehumidification/solar still integrated with photovoltaic panels and solar concentrators (Mahmoud et al. 2018)
Recent studies on the performance of solar distillers using feed water preheating technologies
| Ref | Nature | Solar still type | Improvement-techniques | Results | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mahmoud et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | HDH desalination unit + solar photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) panels combined with solar concentrator | • The system yield was about 17 kg/m2 at basin water temperature 80 °C • Electrical efficiency of PV/T reached 7.8% and 9.4% for the preheated water and air, respectively | The yield decreases with increases in the circulating air flow rate and the basin height |
| Sathyamurthy et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Semi-circular | Semi-circular trough with baffles | The daily yield is 3 kg/m2 with daily efficiency of 38% | The daily yield improved by 16.66% |
| Kabeel and Abdelgaied ( | Experimental | Single slope | Photovoltaic/thermal panels with reflectors + air injection system | • The daily yield reached 6034 ml/m2 with an improvement of 40.98% • Overall efficiency reached 33.55% • Distillate water cost reached 0.014 $/L | Using an air injection system reduced the distillate water cost by 28.57% compared to reference distillers |
| Badran and Al-Tahaineh ( | Experimental | Single slope | Mirrors + Flat plate collector | The productivity increased by 36% | - |
| El-Sebaii et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Shallow solar pond as preheating unit | The maximum daily production reached 6.68 kg/m2 and average efficiency reached 47.54% | - |
| Fallahzadeh et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Pyramid-shaped | Evacuated tube solar water collector | The daily yield reached 6970 ml/m2 and water cost reached 0.0137 $/L | - |
| Amiri et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Parabolic trough collector with tracking systems | Daily yield reached 8 L/m2 Energy efficiency reached 63% | - |
| Hassan et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Parabolic trough solar collector integrated with oil heat exchanger | The daily yield reached 8.77 L/m2; Thermal efficiency 40.3%; Water cost reached 0.01937 $/L | Use of these desalination systems mitigated CO2 compared to other desalination systems depending on fossil fuel |
| Alwan et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Flat plate solar water collector + rotating hollow drum | Productivity reached 5.5 L/m2 day with an improvement of 292%, and the distillate water cost reached 0.048 $/L | The yield improved by 292% compared to reference distillers |
| Azari et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | V-groove solar air collector as preheating unit | The yield, energy, and exergy efficiencies improved by 170%, 170%, and 257%, respectively compared to reference unit; Water cost reached 0.03$/L | - |
| Sharma et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Evacuated tubular solar collector | Daily fresh water yield reached 7.1 kg/m2 | |
| Thakur et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | V-type solar concentrator | Daily yield reached 5.47 L/m2, energy efficiency reached 57.4%, and exergy efficiency reached 3.8%; water cost reached 0.0102 $/L | Use of V-shape concentrator as preheating unit and minimum water depth are useful to augment the highest performance |
Fig. 7Single slope still with magnets and graphite plate fins (Dhivagar and Mohanraj 2021)
Recent studies on the performance of solar distillers using thermal storage mediums
| Ref | Nature | Solar still type | Improvement-techniques | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dhivagar and Mohanraj ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Graphite plate fins as sensible storage materials and magnets | The average productivity of modified distiller was 23.8% higher than the reference unit The energy efficiency improved by 21.3% compared to reference unit |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Pyramid-shaped | Hollow circular fins and paraffin wax as energy storage materials (Solid/liquid heat capacity 2.95/2.51 kJ/kg °C) | The hollow fins utilization increases the cumulative yield to 5.75 L/m2 with 43% improvement PCM addition increases the daily yield to 8.1 L/m2 with 101.5% improvement |
| Kabeel and Abdelgaied ( | Experimental | Single slope | Cylindrical parabolic concentrator + Paraffin wax as energy storage materials (Solid/liquid heat capacity 2.95/2.51 kJ/kg °C) | Freshwater daily productivity reached 10.77 L/m2 Distillate cost reached 0.1378 LE/L Daily efficiency reached 46% |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Tubular | V-corrugated wick materials | V-corrugated wick materials improve the yield to 6010 ml/m2, with an improvement of 44.82% The energy efficiency reached 51.4% |
| El-Bialy ( | Experimental | Single slope | Floating absorber | The daily productivity improvement ratio was 42.2%, 15.2%, 20.1% and 17.2% when mica, stainless steel, aluminum and copper are used as floating absorbers |
| Sellamia et al. ( | Theoretical | Single slope | Heat storage blackened layers of sponge | A 0.5 cm sponge thickness improved a yield by 57.77% |
| Kabeel and Abdelgaied ( | Experimental | Single slope | Coaxial pipes in basin | The daily yield improved by 97.8% The energy efficiency improved by 90.8% |
| Al-Harahsheh et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Solar collector as preheating unit + PV panel + Basin tube filled with sodium acetate trihydrate as storage materials (Solid/liquid heat capacity 2.79/3 kJ/kg °C) | The daily yield reached 9.7 L/m2 and the thermal efficiency reached 54.1% The overall improvement in distillate yield reached 400% compared to reference distiller |
| Maridurai et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Flat plate solar collector + Paraffin wax as energy storage materials (heat capacity 2.2 kJ/kg °C) | The daily yield improved by 22% compared to reference unit |
| Shehata et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Ultrasonic waves, reflectors, paraffin wax as energy storage materials (Solid/liquid heat capacity 2.95/2.51 kJ/kg °C), and evacuated solar collector | Daily yield reached 7.4 L/m2; Distillate cost reached 0.037$/L; Thermal efficiency reached 49%; Distillate yield improved by 44% compared to reference distillers |
| Malik et al. ( | Theoretical | Weir-type | Paraffin wax as energy storage materials (solid/liquid heat capacity 2.95/2.51 kJ/kg °C) | Exergy efficiency and annual distilled water improved by 1.47% and 4.35% compared to reference unit |
| Abu-Arabi et al. ( | Theoretical | Single slope | Flat plate solar collector + sodium acetate trihydrate as energy storage materials (solid/liquid heat capacity 2.79/3 kJ/kg °C) + glass cover cooling | Daily yield reached 7.4 L/m2 and thermal efficiency reached 49.2% |
| Abdelgaied et al. ( | Experimental | Hemispherical | Paraffin wax as energy storage materials (solid/liquid heat capacity 2.17/3.06 kJ/kg °C) and CuO-water–based nanofluid | Distillate productivity improved by 60.41%, and daily thermal efficiency reached 63.61% Water cost 0.0065 $/L |
Recent studies on the performance of solar distillers using nano Al2O3
| Ref | Nature | Solar still type | Material used | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Al2O3 | With the external condenser, the solar still water productivity increased by about 116% Water cost 0.041 $/L |
| Sahota and Tiwari ( | Theoretical | Double slope | 0.12% Al2O3 concentration | The enhancement of yield has been found to be 12.2% |
| Chaichan and Kazem ( | Experimental | Single slope | Paraffin wax with a nano-Al2O3 | Distillate yield improved by 60.53% |
| Modi et al. ( | Experimental | Single-basin dual-slope | 0.1% Al2O3 | Use of Al2O3 improved the yield by 28.53% |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Numerical | Single slope | 0.2% Al2O3 and 0.2% Cu2O | The daily efficiency improved by 73.85% and 84.16% for Al2O3 and Cu2O nanoparticles, respectively |
| Shanmugan et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Al2O3 | The daily yield was 7.460 kg/m2 in summer and 4.120 kg/m2 in winter |
Recent studies on the performance of solar distillers using CuO nanomaterial
| Ref | Nature | Solar still type | Material used | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Modi et al. ( | Experimental | Dual slope | 0.1% CuO concentration | Use of CuO improved the yield by 58.25% |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | 10 to 40% CuO concentration | Utilizing CuO nanoparticles boosted the distillate by 16% and 25% at CuO concentration of 10% and 40%, respectively |
| Gupta et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | 0.12% CuO concentration | Solar still with added nanoparticles produced 3445 ml/m2 per day at water depth of 5 cm |
| El-Gazar et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Al2O3 + CuO 0.025% for each | Enhancement in the still output yield reached 27.2% in summer and 21.7% in winter compared to reference still |
| Attia et al. ( | Experimental | CuO-water–based nanofluid | Daily yield reached 6.8 L/m2 with an improvement of 76.6% Water cost 0.0066 $/L |
Recent studies on the performance of solar distillers using other nanomaterials
| Ref | Nature | Still type | Material used | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Omara et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Al2O3 + cuprous oxide | The yield enhanced by 285.10% and 254.88% for using cuprous and Al2O3 nanoparticles, respectively |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Numerical | Single slope | 0.02% cuprous oxide | The daily yield improved by 106.86% |
| Shanmugan et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | TiO2 | In summer: average daily productivity was 7.89 L, and average efficiency of a system was 36.69% In winter: average daily productivity was 5.39 L, and average efficiency of a system was 57.16% |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Pyramid solar still | TiO2 black paint coated solar still | The distilled yield improved by 6.1% |
| Nijmeh et al. ( | Experimental | Dual slope | KMnO4 | The improvement in energy efficiency reached 26% |
| Elango et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Al2O3, ZnO, Fe2O3 and SnO2 | The yield improved 29.95, 12.67, and 18.63% for Al2O3, ZnO, and SnO2 nanofluids, respectively |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Graphite nanoparticles | The daily yield reached 7.73 L/m2 |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | Paraffin wax and graphite nanoparticles | The daily yield reached to 7.123, 7.475, 7.937, 8.249, and 8.52 L/m2 for 0.0, 5, 10, 15, and 20% graphite mass concentrations, respectively |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Stepped solar still | Graphite and PCM + internal reflectors and evacuated tube collector | The daily distillate productivity varied between 13.6 and 13.62 L/m2 | |
| Rufuss et al. ( | Experimental | Single slope | PCM + TiO2, CuO, and GO nanoparticles | Add TiO2, CuO, and GO nanoparticles to PCM improved the yield to 3.92, 4.94, 5.28 and 3.66 L/ Water cost reached 0.026 $/L |
| Nazari et al. ( | Experimental + Theoretical | Single slope | Cu2O nanofluid + thermoelectric cooling channel | Use of 0.08% Cu2O improved the yield and energy efficiency by 82.4% and 81.5%, respectively Water cost reached 0.021 $/L |
| Kabeel et al. ( | Numerical | Single slope | Cu2O + Al2O3 | Use of 0.02% Cu2O and Al2O3 improved the daily yield to 4090 ml/m2 and 2875 ml/m2, respectively |
| Arani et al. ( | Experimental | SiO2 nanoparticles | Productivity improved by 55.18%, and water cost reached 0.012 $/L |