Optimization of cost-effectiveness and environmental impact in advanced membrane technologies for CO2 capture and utilization
Abstract
This research presents a comprehensive comparative study on advanced membrane technologies for CO2 capture and utilization, focusing on optimizing cost-effectiveness and minimizing environmental impact. The study examines Polymer, Mixed-Matrix, and emerging membrane technologies, with a particular emphasis on Ionic Liquid Membranes and MOF-based Membranes. Ionic Liquid Membranes demonstrate superior CO2 permeability and selectivity, making them ideal for high-purity applications, while MOF-based Membranes offer a balanced performance suitable for diverse conditions. Polymer Membranes emerge as the most cost-effective option upfront; however, their long-term viability is challenged by higher operational costs. Mixed-Matrix Membranes display moderate environmental impact, which could be further reduced by optimizing their fabrication processes. Notably, Electrochemical Membranes exhibit the lowest CO2 emissions, underscoring their environmental advantage. The findings underscore the necessity of advancing Polymer and Mixed-Matrix Membranes by enhancing their economic viability and reducing their carbon footprint. This study provides valuable insights for developing next-generation membrane technologies that harmonize performance, cost, and sustainability, thereby paving the way for more efficient and environmentally friendly CO2 capture and utilization processes.
References
IPCC. (2021). Sixth Assessment Report - Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Houghton, J.T., et al. (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge University Press.
NASA. (2023). Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Retrieved from [NASA Climate Change] (https://climate.nasa.gov/).
Bui, M., et al. (2018). Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward. Energy & Environmental Science, 11(5), 1062-1086. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7EE02342A
Aroonwilas, A., & Wongwises, S. (2009). Chemical absorption of CO2 using amine solutions. Energy Procedia, 1(1), 1409-1416.
Sing, K. S. W., Everett, D. H., Haul, R. A. W., Moscou, L., Pierotti, R. A., Rouquérol, J., & Siemieniewska, T. (1985). Reporting physisorption data for gas/solid systems with special reference to the determination of surface area and porosity (Recommendations 1984). Pure and Applied Chemistry, 57(4), 603-619. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac198557040603
Ruthven, D. M. (1984). Principles of adsorption and adsorption processes. John Wiley & Sons.
Li, D., & Xia, Y. (2020). Electrospinning of nanofibers: Reinventing the wheel? Advanced Materials, 26(24), 4002-4011. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202003013
Chen, Y., Zhang, J., & Sun, D. (2021). 3D printing of membranes: A new era for membrane development. Journal of Membrane Science, 620, 118807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.118807
Liu, J., Chen, C., & Lou, X. W. (2019). Metal-organic frameworks as precursor materials for efficient electrocatalysis. Nature Reviews Materials, 4(7), 551-566. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-019-0104-5
Baker, R. W., & Low, B. T. (2021). Membrane separation systems: Recent developments and future directions. Journal of Membrane Science, 640, 119797.
Alkhudhiri, A., Darwish, N., & Hilal, N. (2020). Hybrid solar membrane distillation systems: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 131, 109877.
Moll, R., Stibius, K. B., & Jacobsen, J. (2019). Environmental life cycle assessment of membrane technology in desalination applications. Journal of Membrane Science, 578, 288-299.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
