Liquid purification involves the removal of undesired components from the liquid. Water desalination is one form of liquid purification in which salts (e.g., anions and/or cations from species that ionize in water) are removed from the water to reduce the dissolved salt content of the water to a desired level.
While there are various known methods for desalinating water, such as reverse osmosis and electrodialysis, these methods are expensive and cost prohibitive for applications on a large or global scale. One major expense associated with the use of these methods is the energy required to pressurize the feed water. For brackish water desalination, the operating pressures range from 250 to 400 psi. For seawater desalination, the operating pressures range from 800 to 1,000 psi. Reverse osmosis and electrodialysis are also relatively low-flux processes and, therefore, produce desalinated water at relatively slow rates. As such, they are not suitable for high-volume desalination, which may be necessary for large-scale applications, such as desalinating water for agricultural purposes.
In view of the above facts, it can be appreciated that it would be desirable to have alternative systems and methods for liquid purification, including water desalination.
The present disclosure may be better understood with reference to the following figures. Matching reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the figures, which are not necessarily drawn to scale.
As described above, it would be desirable to have alternative systems and methods for liquid purification, such as water desalination. Disclosed herein are embodiments of systems and methods for liquid purification that can be used in various applications, including water desalination. The systems comprise one or more porous membranes through which a liquid, such as water, can be passed. The membrane rejects undesired components, such as salts, contained in the liquid to reduce the concentration of the undesired components. In some embodiments, nanopores of the membrane comprise positively and negatively charged zones along their lengths that facilitate the rejection of the undesired components. In some embodiments, the nanopores are asymmetric along their lengths.
It is noted that the embodiments described herein are only illustrative and not intended in any way to restrict the disclosed inventions or the various aspects and features of these inventions. Furthermore, the phraseology and terminology used herein are used for the purpose of description and should not be regarded as limiting. No features, structures, or steps disclosed herein are essential or indispensable to the disclosed inventions.
As identified above, a liquid purification system according to this disclosure comprises one or more porous membranes that can be used to limit the passage of undesired components, such as salts (e.g., ions, charged molecules, etc.), impurities, or contaminants for purposes of removing the components from a liquid, such as water. In some embodiments, the membrane prevents the passage of certain molecules based on their charge. By rejecting these components, the liquid that passes through the membrane is purified (i.e., has a reduced concentration of the components). In some embodiments, the percentage of reduction of the undesired components by the membrane (or a set of membranes) is at least approximately 50%, 70%, 90%, 99%, or ranges including and/or spanning those values.
In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject alkali metal ions (e.g., ions of the Group I metals). In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject alkaline earth metal ions (e.g., ions of the Group II metals). In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject halide ions (e.g., F−, Cl−, Br, I−). In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject the anions of organic molecules (e.g., carboxylate containing organic molecules such as carboxylic acids, etc.). In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject the cations of organic molecules (e.g., ammonium salts of amines). In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to reject one or more ions selected from: K+, Na+, Li+, Cs+, Ca2+, Mg2+, CI−, Br, HPO42−, HSO4−, succinate, and/or acetate. In some embodiments, the membrane is configured to remove one or more of NaCl, KCl, NaH2PO4, sodium succinate, sodium acetate, etc.
In some embodiments, the membrane rejects the undesired components at low pressure differentials. The pressure differential is a parameter quantified as the pressure difference between the liquid to be purified (i.e., the feed solution) and the purified liquid (i.e., the filtrate or permeate). In some embodiments, the membrane operates at a pressure differential no greater than approximately 200 psi, 100 psi, 60 psi, 40 psi, or ranges including and/or spanning these values.
In some embodiments, the membrane rejects the undesired components while achieving high flux through the membrane. In some embodiments, a flux of at least approximately 40 to 80 liters/m2hr, or ranges including and/or spanning these values can be achieved.
In some embodiments, the membrane 16 can be made of one or more of an organic material and an inorganic material. In some embodiments, the membrane 16 comprises one or more organic polymeric materials, such as polyimide (e.g., Kapton), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), other polymers, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, the membrane material comprises one or more inorganic materials, such as mica, silica, silicon nitride, or combinations thereof.
As is also apparent from
A configuration having a non-constant cross-section, as in the example of
As is depicted in
In some embodiments, the surface charges are high-density surface charges. The charge densities can be measured in e/nm2, where e is the “elementary charge.” In some embodiments, the charge densities are at least approximately 0.2 e/nm2, 0.6 e/nm2, 1.0 e/nm2, 2.0 e/nm2, or ranges including and/or spanning the these values. The charge densities can also be measured in Coulombs per m2 (C/m2). In some embodiments, the charge densities are at least approximately 0.03 C/m2, 0.09 C/m2, 0.15 C/m2, 0.30 C/m2, 0.4 C/m2, or ranges including and/or spanning these values.
Irrespective of the particular parameters of the surface charge zones 30, 32, it is the surface charges that electrostatically reject the undesired components from the feed solution 14 so that purified liquid exits the membrane 16 having a reduced concentration of the undesired components. Surprisingly, it has been determined that one can achieve liquid purification, such as water desalination, for higher concentrations of the feed solution than that predicted by the linear Debye-Hueckel theory. Without being bound to a particular mechanism, it is believed that, because the nanopores 20 reject ions by electrostatic action, the nanopores can be larger than the pores of other membranes currently used in existing liquid purification systems. In some embodiments, the smallest cross-section of the nanopore 20 (the opening 24 in the example of
The nanopores 20 are ion selective. Specifically, to fulfill electroneutrality, the solution in the nanopore will primarily contain counterions, e.g., cations, with negative surface charges. The magnitude of the difference in the concentration of counterions and coions depends on the surface charge density of the nanopore walls, opening diameters, bulk electrolyte concentration, and the charges of the ions. When the full non-linear form of the Poisson-Nernst-Planck equations are used, it can be predicted that, in 0.1 M KCl or NaCl, nanopores having a 3 nm effective diameter and a surface charge density of 0.5 elementary charge per nm2 will be filled with counterions (e.g. positive ions, like potassium in the zone with negative surface charges) in 99%. If a pressure difference is applied across the membrane 16, the electroneutrality requirement will enable liquid to pass so that the ionic concentration in the permeate will be significantly lower than in the feed solution. Such modeling also predicts that nanopores 20 with the surface charge pattern shown in
In some embodiments, the desalination efficiency of the membrane 16 for a 100 mM KCl solution is at least approximately 8%, 20%, 60%, 80%, 90%, or ranges including and/or spanning these values. As a specific example, 80% desalination of 100 mM KCl can be achieved using a membrane 16 comprising nanopores 20 having a constant diameter of 10 nm and a surface charge density of at least 0.4 C/m2.
Because of the relatively large dimensions and the asymmetric geometry of the nanopores 20, the membrane 16 is capable of flux rates that are multiple orders of magnitude higher than those of reverse osmosis membranes. By way of example, flux rates of approximately 40 to 80 liters/m2 hr are possible. Because of this, the membrane 16 is well suited for purifying large volumes of liquid, such as water. The larger dimensions and asymmetric geometry also enable the use of much lower pressure differentials. For instance, liquid can be purified using a pressure difference of only 40 to 100 psi for a feed solution having 100 mM KCl. Reverse osmosis desalination systems, on the other hand, typically require pressures of at least 250 psi. The lower pressure requirement translates into lower energy inputs and, therefore, lower costs.
Numerical modeling was also performed for asymmetric nanopores. In particular,
The graphs of
Comparative studies of water flux were also performed for two 5 μm long nanopores at 15 atmospheres. One nanopore was cylindrical with diameter of 10 nm and the other nanopore was conical and had 10 nm and 250 nm diameter openings. It was determined that the water flux through the conical pore was approximately 65 times higher than the flux through the cylindrical pore.
While the foregoing disclosure has identified dissolved salts as an exemplary undesired component of a liquid to be rejected, the systems, methods, and membranes can be generally used to reject ions contained in a feed solution. As described above, examples of such ions include inorganic ions, such as K+, Cl−, Na+, Li+, Cs+, Br, Ca2+, Mg2+, and HPO42−, and small organic ions, such as succinate and acetate. In addition, while water has been identified as an exemplary liquid to be purified, the disclosed systems, methods, and membranes are also applicable to the purification of other liquids, such as acetic acid, acetone, acetonitrile, benzene, 1-butanol, 2-butanol, 2-butanone, t-butyl alcohol, carbon tetrachloride, chlorobenzene, chloroform, cyclohexane, 1,2-dichloroethane, diethylene glycol, diethyl ether, diglyme (diethylene glycol dimethyl ether), 1,2-dimethoxy-ethane (glyme, DME), dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), 1,4-dioxane, ethanol, ethyl acetate, ethylene glycol, glycerin, heptane, Hexamethylphosphoramide (HMPA), Hexamethylphosphorous, triamide (HMPT), hexane, methanol, methyl t-butyl, ether (MTBE), methylene chloride, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone (NMP), nitromethane, pentane, Petroleum ether (ligroine), 1-propanol, 2-propanol, pyridine, tetrahydrofuran (THF), toluene, triethyl amine, water, water, o-xylene, m-xylene, p-xylene, and combinations thereof.
Experiments were performed to test asymmetric charged membranes of the type shown in
In order to achieve a surface charge pattern similar to that shown in
It is noted that other chemistries can be used to impart positive surface charges to the nanopores, such as plasma modification or silanol-based chemistries for some inorganic materials. It is further noted that a similar approach can be used to enhance the density of negative surface charges. This can be accomplished through attachment of molecules containing one amine group and multiple carboxyl groups. Alternatively, the surface could first be aminated, followed by attachment of molecules with multiple negatively charged carboxyl groups (e.g., poly(glutamic acid)), one of which being used to create a peptide bond.
It is noted that the PET membranes did not rectify the current, possibly due to larger heterogeneity of the pore openings (caused by semicrystalline structure of the material) and a smaller opening angle compared to Kapton pores.
Experiments were also performed to test the effectiveness of 10 fabricated nanopore membranes in rejecting KCl from water. Eight of these membranes were polyimide (Kapton) membranes and two of the membranes were PET membranes. Some of the membranes were chemically modified in the manner described above in Example 1 to provide them with high-density surface charges, while other membranes were left unmodified. The modified Kapton membranes were modified using spermine, while the modified PET membranes were modified using diamine.
The experiments were performed in a pressurized conductivity cell. The results of the experiments are presented in Table 1. In Table 1, “diode” indicates that the membrane had a diode surface charge pattern comprising a zone with positive surface charges and a zone with negative surface charges. The unmodified Kapton membranes rejected salt (from 100 mM KCl) at the level of approximately 15%. The chemical modification of Kapton membranes improved the rejection levels to 30% and higher. The data for Membrane 3 show that higher salt rejection can be achieved from a solution with lower salt concentration (50% rejection from 100 mM, and 65% from 50 mM). Salt rejection was also observed for the two PET membranes. Membrane 9 was not chemically modified and, therefore, contained only negatively charged carboxylate groups. This membrane did not reject any salt. After modification with diamines, however, the same membrane rejected salt at the 32% level from 100 mM KCl.
This application claims priority to co-pending U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/509,345, filed May 22, 2017, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2018/033832 | 5/22/2018 | WO | 00 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62509345 | May 2017 | US |