| Literature DB >> 35493188 |
Chengzhi Yu1, Wenjun Yin1, Zhenjiang Yu1, Jiabin Chen1, Rui Huang2, Xuefei Zhou1,3.
Abstract
Membrane technologies have broad potential in methods for separating, collecting, storing, and utilizing urine collected from toilets. Recovering urine from toilets for resource utilization instead of treating it in a sewage treatment plant not only reduces extra energy consumption for the degradation of N and P but also saves energy in chemical fertilizer production, which will contribute to carbon emission reduction of 12.19-17.82 kg kgN -1 in terms of N alone. Due to its high efficiency in terms of volume reduction, water recycling, nutrient recovery, and pollutant removal, membrane technology is a promising technology for resource utilization from urine collected from toilets. In this review, we divide membrane technologies for resource utilization from urine collected from toilets into four categories based on the driving force: external pressure-driven membrane technology, vapor pressure-driven membrane technology, chemical potential-driven membrane technology, and electric field-driven membrane technology. These technologies influence factors such as: recovery targets and mechanisms, reaction condition optimization, and process efficiency, and these are all discussed in this review. Finally, a toilet with source-separation is suggested. In the future, membrane technology research should focus on the practical application of source-separation toilets, membrane fouling prevention, and energy consumption evaluation. This review may provide theoretical support for the resource utilization of urine collected from toilets that is based on membrane technology. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35493188 PMCID: PMC9043190 DOI: 10.1039/d1ra05816a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Membrane technologies classified according to the driving force (MBR – membrane bioreactor, NF – nanofiltration, MF microfiltration, UF – ultrafiltration, RO – reverse osmosis, FO – forward osmosis, ED – electrodialysis, and MD – membrane distillation).
The composition and properties of human urine
| Component | Concentration | Component | Concentration |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 4.88–9.3 | Mg (mg L−1) | 11–121 |
| TN (mg L−1) | 254–7109 | TDS (mg L−1) | 12 700–24 380 |
| TP (mg L−1) | 210–740 | Alkalinity (mg CaCO3 per L) | 14 230–16 890 |
| COD (mg L−1) | 3600–19 906 | NH3 (mg L−1) | 254–7100 |
| K (mg L−1) | 863–2250 | Conductivity (mS cm−1) | 13.08–43.7 |
| S (mg L−1) | 505–1500 | PO4 (mg L−1) | 180–740 |
| Na (mg L−1) | 508–3730 | NO3 (mg L−1) | 9.74–10.26 |
| Cl (mg L−1) | 3000–5346 | NO2 (mg L−1) | 44.18–45.22 |
| Ca (mg L−1) | (17.7–32) | SO4 (mg L−1) | 681–1500 |
Fig. 2A timeline of the development of membrane processes (specific references to the literature are shown in the text of S1, ESI†).
The application of external pressure-driven membrane technologiesa
| Process | RC | Target | Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RO | HU | Urea and ammonia retention | 64% unionized ammonia, 93% TOC retention |
|
| RO | FU | 57% urea retention, ≥92% TOC retention, 86% conductivity decrease |
| |
| RO | FU and HU pH 9 | P recovery | 2.58 kg and 1.24 kg of precipitates from 1 m3 HU and FU, precipitated solids contain 8.1–19.0% P, 10.3–15.2% Ca, 3.7–5.0% Mg, and 0.1–3.5% ammonium nitrogen |
|
| RO | Mixed water | Water recovery | 87 ± 5% water recovery |
|
| NF | HU, pH 11.5 | 90% unionized ammonia recovery, 98% TOC retention |
| |
| NF | FU, pH 5 | Urea retention | 56% urea retention, ≥92% TOC retention, 96–97% conductivity decrease |
|
| RO-MBR | FU | N removal and P recovery | 90% phosphorus recovery, 45% nitrogen removal |
|
Note: FU – fresh urine, HU – hydrolyzed urine, RC – reaction conditions, TOC – total organic carbon.
The application of vapor pressure-driven membrane technologiesa
| Process | RC | Target | Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DCMD | FU | Volume reduction and nutrient concentration | Urine concentrated 17.8 times, 97% P and K rejection |
|
| DCMD | Specific ammonia transfer inhibition | SAT was reduced to 6.91 × 10−5 g-N per g-H2O |
| |
| MD | HU, pH 10, water vapor gradient 30 °C | Water recovery | 80% water recovery, 98% of TOC, 98% of Na+, and 89% of K+ rejected |
|
| IMD-AC | HU | Ammonia recovery | 60% ammonia recovery, 95% energy saving |
|
| FO-MD | FU | Water recovery | 98% TOC, TN, and NH4+ removal |
|
| FO-MD | FU and HU | Water recovery | Water flux of 31.5 (FU) to 28.7 (HU) L m−2 h−1 |
|
| MD-MBR | HU | Non-odorous high-concentration liquid fertilizer production | Total dissolved solid concentration of 280 g L−1 |
|
Note: RC – reaction conditions, FU – fresh urine, HU – hydrolyzed urine.
Fig. 3The IMD-AC process.
The application of chemical potential-driven membrane technologiesa
| Process | RC | Target | Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FO | HU | Volume reduction | The urine volumes were reduced to 1/2–1/5 |
|
| FO | FU | Ammonia recovery | 86% recovery of ammonia |
|
| DS pH < 6.5 | ||||
| FS pH > 11 | ||||
| FO | FS | N, P recovery | 40% N recovery, 50% P recovery |
|
| FO | FS | Urine concentration | 50% N recovery, 93% P recovery, economic benefits are 5.3 times the running cost |
|
| FO | HU | Water recovery | 89% TN rejection with 75% water recovery using 5 M NaCl as the DS, 97% TN rejection with 50% water recovery using 5 M glucose as the DS |
|
| FO | Cave exploration | Urine volume reduction | 86% TN rejection with 75% water recovery |
|
| FO | FU, HU |
| Algal concentration was increased four-fold |
|
| FO-MD | FU | Urea recovery | 45–68% urea concentration with 90% TOC rejection |
|
Note: FU – fresh urine, HU – hydrolyzed urine, RC – reaction conditions.
Fig. 4The FDFO process.
The application of electric field-driven membrane technologiesa
| Process | RC | Target | Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ED | Nitrogen recovery | 95.6% nitrogen recovery |
| |
| EDMBR | HU | Phosphate and sulfate recovery | 65% phosphate recovery, 54.9% sulfate recovery |
|
| MBR-ED | FU | Urine treatment | 80% ion collection |
|
| RED | FU and HU | Energy recovery | A maximum |
|
| MD-RED | Water and energy recovery | 47% Gibbs free energy recovery |
|
Note: FU – fresh urine, HU – hydrolyzed urine, RC – reaction conditions.
Fig. 5The MD-RED process.