New Nano Desalinization Method 216
lbmouse writes "The Technology Review is reporting that researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have announced a way to use carbon nano-tube technology to reduce the cost of desalination of ocean water by 75 percent over current methods of reverse osmosis. From the article: 'The technology could potentially provide a solution to water shortages both in the United States, where populations are expected to soar in areas with few freshwater sources, and worldwide, where a lack of clean water is a major cause of disease.' The technology may also lead to new ways of eliminating carbon dioxide emitted from power plants."
Full Article (Slashdotted) (Score:2, Informative)
Carbon nanotube-based membranes will dramatically cut the cost of desalination.
A water desalination system using carbon nanotube-based membranes could significantly reduce the cost of purifying water from the ocean. The technology could potentially provide a solution to water shortages both in the United States, where populations are expected to soar in areas with few freshwater sources, and worldwide, where a lack of clean water is a major cause of disease.
The new membranes, developed by researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), could reduce the cost of desalination by 75 percent, compared to reverse osmosis methods used today, the researchers say. The membranes, which sort molecules by size and with electrostatic forces, could also separate various gases, perhaps leading to economical ways to capture carbon dioxide emitted from power plants, to prevent it from entering the atmosphere.
The carbon nanotubes used by the researchers are sheets of carbon atoms rolled so tightly that only seven water molecules can fit across their diameter. Their small size makes them good candidates for separating molecules. And, despite their diminutive dimensions, these nanopores allow water to flow at the same rate as pores considerably larger, reducing the amount of pressure needed to force water through, and potentially saving energy and costs compared to reverse osmosis using conventional membranes.
Indeed, the LLNL team measures water flow rates up to 10,000 times faster than would be predicted by classical equations, which suggest that flow rates through a pore will slow to a crawl as the diameter drops. "It's something that is quite counter-intuitive," says LLNL chemical engineer Jason Holt, whose findings appeared in the 19 May issue of Science. "As you shrink the pore size, there is a huge enhancement in flow rate."
The surprising results might be due to the smooth interior of the nanotubes, or to physics at this small scale -- more research is needed to understand the mechanisms involved. "In some physical systems the underlying assumptions are not valid at these smaller length scales," says Rod Ruoff, a physical chemist and professor of mechanical engineering at Northwestern University (who was not involved with the work).
To make the membranes, the researchers started with a silicon wafer about the size of a quarter, coated with a metal nanoparticle catalyst for growing carbon nanotubes. Holt says the small particles allow the nanotubes to grow "like blades of grass -- vertically aligned and closely packed." Once grown, the gaps between the nanotubes are filled with a ceramic material, silicon nitride, which provides stability and helps the membrane adhere to the underlying silicon wafer. The field of nanotubes functions as an array of pores, allowing water and certain gases through, while keeping larger molecules and clusters of molecules at bay.
Holt estimates that these membranes could be brought to market within the next five to ten years. "The challenge is to scale up so we can produce usable amounts of these membrane materials for desalination, or gas separation, the other high-impact application for these membranes," he says, adding that the fabrication process is "inherently scalable."
Eventually, the membranes could be adapted for a variety of applications, ranging from pharmaceuticals to the food industry, where they could be used to separate sugars, for example, says co-author Olgica Bakajin, a physicist at LLNL. "Practically, the next step is figuring out how to take a general concept and modify it to a specific application," Bakajin says.
"There are many studies that one can imagine to build upon this study," says Northwestern's Ruoff. "Our understanding of molecular processes will be helped by experiments of this type. There are interesting possibilities for nanofluidic applications, such as in nanoelectromechanical systems and in 'smart' switching [on and off] of the flow through such small channels."
Energy (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Desalinization vs Condensation? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Small pore, more flow ? (Score:5, Informative)
The reason that the gas and liquid transport through nanotubes is so much higher than you might expect is due to the smoothness of the inside walls. The classic hydrodynamic equations have some amount of surface roughness inherently built into them. If you just naively scale them down to nano-dimensions, you'll predict very high resistance to fluid flow. However carbon nanotubes have "perfect" inside walls, that are atomically flat. This allows the water molecules (or gas, or whatever travelling inside them) to travel without "getting caught" or "bumping" into defects. In essence the atomic smoothness of the walls brings us into a whole new (nano) hydrodynamic regime.
This effect was predicted by computer simulations previously, but now has been actually observed in real samples. Very impressive.
Re:stop watering your lawn (Score:5, Informative)
Plant a lawn that works with your local climate. It's better for the environment and better for the household budget.
Re:Where? (Score:1, Informative)
Initial toxicity test refuted. (Score:4, Informative)
Based on this, carbon nanotubes should probably be considered cleared of causing cell death for now.
Inconvenient for your filter, but a boon for many many other applications.
Re:Wow, 75% cheaper (Score:5, Informative)
1000 BTU/pound of water (Score:5, Informative)
That ocean water scheme is taking much lower grade heat, thermodynamically, than the energy in Diesel fuel, but it still requires 1000 BTU's of heat per pound of water (8000 BTU's per gallon). That is a lot of heat to take out of the environment, and a lot of heat to transfer.
Another way for more efficient desalination is to recycle that 1000 BTU/lb -- use 1000 BTU to evaporate a pound of water to purify it and then condense that water vapor to get back that heat to evaporate more water. Trouble is that water condenses at the same temperature it evaporates, and you need at least a small temperature differential to get heat to flow downhill.
There are two approaches to recycling the heat. One approach is multi-effect distillation. You evaporate at a higher temperature and pressure, and then condense at that same temperature, which you use to evaporate other water at a lower temperature and pressure in a vacuum chamber. You have a cascade of evaporators at successively lower pressures and keep reusing the same heat. This method was developed by Norbert Rillieux, the Louisiana son of a French engineer and an American former slave, and is widely used in food preparation -- sugar from cane or beets, orange juice concentrate, and so on.
The second approach is vapor compression. You boil at one temperature, but you condense at a higher temperature by compressing the vapor to a higher pressure using something akin to an automotive supercharger driven by an electric motor, and that way the heat from condensing at a slightly higher temperature and pressure is recovered by the evaporator. This requires only a single "effect" on account of the vapor pump instead of the multi-effect cascade into successively lower pressure chambers, but it needs the electric motor and vapor pump, and you need to move a lot of heat at low temperature differentials across large surface area plate heat exchangers.
Reverse osmosis is a pure mechanical process that doesn't require exchange of the 1000 BTUs per pound of water, but the osmosis membrane offers resistance to pumping in excess of the natural osmotic pressure (the pressure differential required to overcome the salinity differential, the PV work representing the true thermodynamic cost of desalinating the water, which is much less than the 1000 BTU's per pound). By the way, it is always more cost effective to desalinate slightly-salty (brackish) water from marshes or irrigation runoff or other sources than going for the highly-salty sea water on account of the energy inherent in the dissolved salt as reflected in the higher osmotic pressure).
Re:could be important for a hydrogen economy (Score:5, Informative)
Well, if there's salt in the water and you attempt electrolysis, you'll get chlorine gas and NaOH in solution. It's actually the modern process for producing sodium lye (aptly named the chlor-alkali process). Once you run out of chloride ions to convert to chlorine, then you start to produce hydrogen gas, but now you've got some high pH liquid in your reaction vessel, and you probably have other reactions going on that you didn't intend...
Regards,
Ross
Re:Wow, 75% cheaper (Score:3, Informative)
So far what they have is a workable, small scale (no pun intended), test solution to the problem of water filtration. But there is little novel, or unobvious, in what they have done.
If there is a patent in this it will be in the process used to create commercial quantities of nanotube filters.
There are of course usually several ways of skinning your animal of choice, so in fact it is probable that there will be several patents sought for nanotube manufacturing processes - this is by and large a good thing - however...
I will leave you to draw your own analogy as regards software patents.
Re:Water + salt through filter clogs system? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Where does the lawn water go? (Score:5, Informative)
Georgia, btw, happens to be where I live. One of the main "crops" here is slash pine, which is what most paper is made from. TONS of papermills. Papermills use tons of water. They don't use crap water either, they pump the good stuff out of deep aquifers. We've got salt intrusion all down the damn coast, up into S. Carolina, and down into Florida. What does that mean? It means your magic well in a coastal county is full of salt, and the salt is moving inland. Why?
Ground water takes a while to replenish, and aquifers take, literally, centuries. When you pump water out of the ground, it doesn't come right back, and when it does come back, it moves in from the surrounding area and the ground water levels everywhere go down. That's the whole idea of a watershed, and there are 52 watersheds [riversalive.org] in georgia. Sounds like a lot doesn't it? Well there are 5 around atlanta, and they're all laughably overutilized. Pull that water out of the ground and dump it in a river, and some evaporates, and the rest of it flows on out to sea. Only the tiniest fraction of that water makes it back into the ground. So when you have low ground water on the coast, the ocean moves in to fill the lack.
A hundred years ago you could drill a hole in the ground, and you'd get a spring, water bubbling out on it's own. Now you drill a hole 5 times as deep, and put a big pump on it to get the same amount. We're running it down, and running it down quick, and, thanks to the attitude that we live in a land of inexaustable water, it's only getting worse.
I'm not that much of an environmentalist. I'm really not. But water is a big deal, a HUGE deal, and people who think that the supply is inexhaustable anywhere are living in a dreamworld. In the Southeast, it's a problem. In the midwest, it's a crisis, we're talking 10 years at best. It's no better in the west. We need a way to create cheap, clean water, and we need it BAD and we need it NOW. Failing that, we need people to stop blowing water on crap that doesn't matter.