Cargando…

Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance

Fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis (FDFO) has garnered immense attention for its application in the agricultural field and its potential to reuse wastewater sustainably. Membrane fouling, however, remains to be a challenge for the process. This study aims to investigate the influence of membrane fouli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khraisheh, Majeda, Gulied, Mona, AlMomani, Fares
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32962071
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090243
_version_ 1783594624888078336
author Khraisheh, Majeda
Gulied, Mona
AlMomani, Fares
author_facet Khraisheh, Majeda
Gulied, Mona
AlMomani, Fares
author_sort Khraisheh, Majeda
collection PubMed
description Fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis (FDFO) has garnered immense attention for its application in the agricultural field and its potential to reuse wastewater sustainably. Membrane fouling, however, remains to be a challenge for the process. This study aims to investigate the influence of membrane fouling on the performance of the FDFO process. Synthetic wastewater (SWW) and multi-component fertilizer (MCF) were used as feed solution (FS) and draw solution (DS) with cellulose triacetate (CTA) forward osmosis (FO) membrane orientation. The performance was evaluated through water flux (WF), percentage recovery and percentage of salt reject. The WF declined from 10.32 LMH (L/m(2)·h) to 3.30 LMH when ultra-pure water as FS was switched with concentration FS indicating the dependence of the performance on the type of FS used. Accelerated fouling experiments conducted to verify the fouling behavior showed a decline in the water flux from 8.6 LMH to 3.09 LMH with SWW and 13.1 LMH to 3.42 LMH when deionized water was used as FS. The effects of osmotic backwashing and in situ flushing as physical cleaning methods of the foul membrane were studied through water flux and salt recovery percentage. Both cleaning methods yielded a WF close to the baseline. Osmotic backwashing yielded better results by eliminating foulant–foulant and foulant–membrane adhesion. The cleaning methods were able to recover 75% of phosphate and 60% of nitrate salts. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) results validated the effectiveness of the methods for the physical cleaning of foul membranes. This study underlines the importance of the FS used in FDFO and the effectiveness of osmotic backwashing as a cleaning method of FO membranes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7558361
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75583612020-10-22 Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance Khraisheh, Majeda Gulied, Mona AlMomani, Fares Membranes (Basel) Article Fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis (FDFO) has garnered immense attention for its application in the agricultural field and its potential to reuse wastewater sustainably. Membrane fouling, however, remains to be a challenge for the process. This study aims to investigate the influence of membrane fouling on the performance of the FDFO process. Synthetic wastewater (SWW) and multi-component fertilizer (MCF) were used as feed solution (FS) and draw solution (DS) with cellulose triacetate (CTA) forward osmosis (FO) membrane orientation. The performance was evaluated through water flux (WF), percentage recovery and percentage of salt reject. The WF declined from 10.32 LMH (L/m(2)·h) to 3.30 LMH when ultra-pure water as FS was switched with concentration FS indicating the dependence of the performance on the type of FS used. Accelerated fouling experiments conducted to verify the fouling behavior showed a decline in the water flux from 8.6 LMH to 3.09 LMH with SWW and 13.1 LMH to 3.42 LMH when deionized water was used as FS. The effects of osmotic backwashing and in situ flushing as physical cleaning methods of the foul membrane were studied through water flux and salt recovery percentage. Both cleaning methods yielded a WF close to the baseline. Osmotic backwashing yielded better results by eliminating foulant–foulant and foulant–membrane adhesion. The cleaning methods were able to recover 75% of phosphate and 60% of nitrate salts. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) results validated the effectiveness of the methods for the physical cleaning of foul membranes. This study underlines the importance of the FS used in FDFO and the effectiveness of osmotic backwashing as a cleaning method of FO membranes. MDPI 2020-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7558361/ /pubmed/32962071 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090243 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Khraisheh, Majeda
Gulied, Mona
AlMomani, Fares
Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title_full Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title_fullStr Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title_short Effect of Membrane Fouling on Fertilizer-Drawn Forward Osmosis Desalination Performance
title_sort effect of membrane fouling on fertilizer-drawn forward osmosis desalination performance
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32962071
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes10090243
work_keys_str_mv AT khraishehmajeda effectofmembranefoulingonfertilizerdrawnforwardosmosisdesalinationperformance
AT guliedmona effectofmembranefoulingonfertilizerdrawnforwardosmosisdesalinationperformance
AT almomanifares effectofmembranefoulingonfertilizerdrawnforwardosmosisdesalinationperformance