Abstract
Membrane filtration is a major process used in the energy, gas separation, and water treatment sectors, yet the efficiency of current membranes is limited. Here, we review the use of machine learning to improve membrane efficiency, with emphasis on reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, pervaporation, removal of pollutants, pathogens and nutrients, gas separation of carbon dioxide, oxygen and hydrogen, fuel cells, biodiesel, and biogas purification. We found that the use of machine learning brings substantial improvements in performance and efficiency, leading to specialized membranes with remarkable potential for various applications. This integration offers versatile solutions crucial for addressing global challenges in sustainable development and advancing environmental goals. Membrane gas separation techniques improve carbon capture and purification of industrial gases, aiding in the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The global landscape is witnessing a seismic shift driven by two paramount imperatives: sustainable development and environmental preservation. Against a backdrop of alarming statistics, the world grapples with ever-increasing energy demands, depleting fossil fuel reserves, and the urgent need to combat climate change (Osman et al. 2023). Additionally, issues such as water and air pollution further underscored the need for a paradigm shift in how we perceive and interact with our planet. As a response to these challenges, sustainable development emerged as a concerted effort to transform the prevailing mindset (Hajian and Jangchi Kashani 2021). As a response to global warming and environmental pollution, the United Nations has developed sustainable development goals (SDGs) for the year 2030, which emphasize the urgent need for inexpensive and clean energy, comprehensive and long-term economic growth, and technological advancement as methods of battling climate change (Halawy et al. 2022; Hassan et al. 2022a, 2022b; Islam et al. 2022; Raihan et al. 2023). These objectives were established to fulfill the Paris Climate Change Agreement, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and build a more sustainable future for the planet (SDGs 7, 8, 9, and 13) (Raihan et al. 2023).
Notably, the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts a staggering 27% surge in energy demand by the year 2040, primarily driven by emerging economies and population growth. In this context, the imperative of limiting global temperature rise to within 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, as advocated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), takes on critical significance, calling for a climate emergency. The year 2030 looms as a pivotal milestone, with projections indicating that global temperatures may cross this threshold, leading to dire consequences in the form of sea-level rise, extreme weather events, and ecosystem disruptions. In response to these formidable challenges, innovative technologies have risen to prominence as indispensable tools in the pursuit of sustainable solutions. Among these technologies, membrane technology emerges as a versatile and promising solution, poised to play a pivotal role in addressing the dual imperatives of energy efficiency and sustainability (Wang et al. 2023b; Zhao et al. 2023b). Membrane technology has emerged as a versatile and promising solution for various applications, including sustainable water treatment, gas separation, and energy production, as shown in Fig. 1. As the world strives to reduce global carbon emissions from energy by 73%, the importance of membrane technology shines brighter.
The integration of machine learning has ushered in a revolutionary era for membrane design, bringing about substantial improvements in performance and efficiency. Through the power of algorithms, machine learning can scrutinize extensive datasets to forecast critical membrane properties such as selectivity and permeability, thus pinpointing materials with remarkable potential. Moreover, machine learning goes beyond mere prediction; it delves into intricate relationships within membrane structures, facilitating the development of tailored and specialized membranes for distinct applications. Notably, these machine learning models extend their influence beyond individual membranes and optimize entire systems by harnessing diverse data sources. This holistic approach results in the creation of integrated membrane systems that outperform their conventional counterparts, marking a significant advancement in membrane technology (Guan et al. 2022; Alizamir et al. 2023).
The novelty of this review is to explore and integrate the application of membrane technology enhanced by machine learning in addressing key challenges in water treatment, gas separation, and energy production. The integration of machine learning in membrane design and discovery is emphasized, as it enables the prediction of membrane properties and system optimization, leading to the development of specialized membranes for specific applications. In addition, the review aims to highlight the potential of membrane technology as a sustainable solution for clean water access, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and enhancement of energy production efficiency.
Machine learning for membrane design and discovery
The adoption of artificial intelligence, particularly machine learning, in numerous membrane applications has spurred significant advancements in addressing environmental engineering challenges, with a specific focus on combating membrane fouling. These recent developments have introduced modern techniques, including artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, model trees, and genetic programming. Their implementation has yielded remarkable success on a global scale (Bagheri et al. 2019).
Machine learning, a subset of artificial intelligence, possesses the inherent capability to autonomously discern patterns by leveraging acquired data. This process of data collection empowers machines to offer appropriate responses when presented with new data arrays (Chen et al. 2020). Consequently, machine learning has earned the reputation of being a data-driven approach in the realm of designing functional materials, including polymers. Machine learning excels in predicting a diverse range of polymer characteristics, such as refractive index, glass transition temperature, and dielectric constant, by employing various meaningful descriptors with differing natures and scales. Additionally, machine learning has proven highly successful in diverse research communities, notably within the fields of chemistry and material science (Xu and Jiang 2022).
Machine learning methods find application in a wide array of tasks, including regression estimation, clustering, and classification. It is crucial to note that the choice of the appropriate machine learning method holds significant sway over the models’ ability to generalize and estimate effectively. Therefore, the selection of the machine learning algorithm should be a meticulous and precise endeavor (Liu et al. 2017). Artificial neural networks, often described as black-box methods, play a pivotal role in this landscape. They establish a map** between inputs and target outputs through a combination of biases, weights, and nonlinear and linear functions. This intricate process results in reasonably accurate predictions of values such as water flux and ion retention (Fetanat et al. 2021b). While neural network types may vary depending on the specific application, the fundamental structural principles remain consistent.
Machine learning encompasses two main categories: supervised learning and unsupervised learning, each with distinct characteristics. In unsupervised learning, only the features (represented as "x") are provided, leading to common techniques like clustering, dimensionality reduction, and pattern recognition. On the other hand, supervised learning involves providing both features ("x") and corresponding label data ("y"), facilitating the creation of map** functions through regression or classification algorithms (Li et al. 2020). These algorithms are instrumental in achieving the design and enhancement of membrane separation processes.
The integration of machine learning in membrane design and discovery has opened new possibilities for enhancing membrane performance and efficiency, as depicted in Fig. 2. Machine learning algorithms leverage computational power and data analysis techniques to optimize various aspects of membrane technology, including materials, structures, and processes (Wang et al. 2023a). Machine learning algorithms are particularly effective in predicting and optimizing membrane properties. By analyzing large datasets of membrane materials, these models can identify patterns and correlations that are not visible through traditional methods. They can accurately predict the performance of new membrane materials, such as selectivity, permeability, and stability, enabling researchers to screen a wide range of potential materials and identify the most promising candidates for specific applications (Alizamir et al. 2023).
The improvement of membrane structures also greatly benefits from the use of machine learning methods. They can examine complex relationships between many structural factors, including the performance of membranes and their effects on pore size, surface roughness, and surface charge. With this knowledge, machine learning models may direct the creation of membranes with specialized features that satisfy certain separation needs. Researchers can boost selectivity, raise flux rates, and improve durability by modifying the membrane structure, which would increase overall efficiency. The promise of machine learning in membrane design and discovery extends beyond the optimization of individual components to the system level. To create complete models that optimize the entire membrane system, machine learning algorithms may incorporate data from several sources, including membrane materials, process variables, and performance metrics. These models can pinpoint how various parts work together synergistically, allowing researchers to create integrated membrane systems that are more effective and perform better (Gao et al. 2022; Guan et al. 2022; Yin et al. 2022).
Artificial neural networks are applied in different membrane fabrications and separation techniques, such as reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, ultrafiltration, and microfiltration (Fetanat et al. 2021a), where perceptron and multilayer perceptron are the most utilized network structures (Yin et al. 2022). For example, artificial neural networks have been utilized for the prediction of magnesium chloride and sodium chloride rejection within the sweater by utilizing nanofiltration membranes (Darwish et al. 2007). Despite the swift growth in the development of material, the current membranes, even with high performance, do not sufficiently meet the industrial demands. Furthermore, new membranes are developed under a large trial-and-error process; additionally, the preparation and examination of membranes is money and time-consuming, which could be impossible sometimes. Machine learning can tackle such restrictions and save researchers time from wasteful rehandling work. Subsequently, researchers devote their time to more challenging issues.
Modeling plays a crucial role in achieving efficient and cost-effective process design and allows for the scaling-up of membrane systems. However, mathematical models often lack sufficient detail to accurately represent the underlying physical phenomena. They are unable to describe dynamic process behaviors and are limited to specific feeds under certain conditions. Artificial neural networks, on the other hand, are an effective predictive tool for modeling complex, nonlinear systems (Al-Zoubi et al. 2007; Madaeni et al. 2010).
In terms of membrane fabrication, Madaeni et al. (2010) focused on the modeling and optimization of membrane fabrication using artificial neural networks and genetic algorithms. A genetic algorithm (GA) performs random searches through a given set to find the best criteria of goodness, expressed as an objective or fitness function. The researchers conducted experiments on polyethersulfone (PES) and polysulfone (PS) membranes prepared by immersion participation using different solvents, non-solvents, and additives. The mechanical, chemical, and thermal properties of polymers, solvents, non-solvents, and additives were elucidated for introducing the artificial neural network. The effects of polymer and additive concentrations on membrane performance were investigated using a validated artificial neural network. The optimum concentrations to achieve maximum flux for quaternary systems (PES/polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)/dimethylacetamide (DMAc)/2-propanol (IPA) + water) and (PS/PVP/DMAc/IPA + water) were estimated using a genetic algorithm and assembled an artificial neural network. For the polyethersulfone membrane, a good agreement was found with experimental data and scanning electron microscopy micrographs with relative errors of 5% and 1% for flux and rejection.
In recently published research, Li et al. (2022) optimized the fabrication of membranes for wastewater treatment using novel methods by a combination of the response surface method (RSM) and artificial neural network. The aim was to develop high-performance membranes to address water pollution issues effectively. The authors proposed the integration of the response surface method and artificial neural network to optimize the conditions for electroless nickel plating (ENP) of polyvinylidene fluoride-nickel (PVDF-Ni) membranes. The response surface method was used to determine the optimal reaction temperature, reaction duration, and ammonia amount based on experimental data. The combined response surface method-artificial neural network method was then employed to predict the flux and rejection performance of the optimized membrane. The results showed that the predicted flux and rejection values of the optimized membrane closely matched the actual values, with low relative errors of 3.64% and 0.58%, respectively. Scanning electron microscopy analysis confirms the favorable microporous structure of the optimized membrane. The study highlighted the potential of using artificial intelligence techniques, specifically artificial neural networks, in optimizing membrane fabrication processes. By integrating the response surface method and artificial neural network, the proposed method offers a promising approach to enhance membrane synthesis and performance prediction. The findings contributed to the development of high-performance membranes for efficient wastewater treatment, addressing the challenges of water pollution and sustainable development.
Ritt et al. (2022) focused on the development of single-species selective membranes for high-precision separations, necessitating a fundamental understanding of molecular interactions governing solute transport. They comprehensively assessed molecular-level features influencing the separation of 18 different anions by nanoporous cellulose acetate membranes. The analysis identified the limitations of bulk solvation characteristics in explaining ion transport, as highlighted by the poor correlation between hydration energy and the measured permselectivity (R2 = 0.37). Entropy-enthalpy compensation, spanning 40 kilojoules per mole, led to a free-energy barrier (∆G) variation of only about 8 kilojoules per mole across all anions. The study applied machine learning to elucidate descriptors for energetic barriers from a set of 126 collected features. Notably, electrostatic features accounted for 75% of the overall features used to describe ∆G despite the relatively uncharged state of cellulose acetate. This work presented an approach for studying ion transport across nanoporous membranes that could enable the design of ion-selective membranes.
Artificial intelligence, as a comprehensive concept, encompasses big data, machine learning, representation learning, expert systems, and computer vision. Algorithms play a vital role in executing the operations within artificial intelligence techniques (Zhang and Lu 2021). The algorithms utilized in artificial intelligence techniques include artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, support vector machines, genetic programming, and search algorithms (Zhong et al. 2021). Optimization approaches like genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization are key components of search algorithms. These optimization techniques enhance the performance of modeling methods and guide the optimization of operational conditions in membrane separation processes. In addition, search algorithms can be combined with other modeling algorithms, such as artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, and support vector machines. The integration of these hybrid algorithms often leads to improved performance due to the distinct advantages provided by different search algorithms (Niu et al. 2022). The ability to precisely predict membrane separation performance offers significant advantages, primarily in terms of efficiency and cost-effectiveness (Boyd et al. 2019). In practice, membrane performance at the pilot scale often falls short of what is predicted by theoretical models (Zhu et al. 2020). This is where machine learning plays a pivotal role in the fields of chemistry and material science.
Artificial neural networks and their variations have been applied in numerous research endeavors to predict both membrane separation performance and fouling tendencies. The majority of studies utilizing artificial neural networks for membrane fouling prediction have consistently achieved a high level of accuracy over the last two decades (Kamali et al. 2021; Niu et al. 2022). In terms of membrane fouling, (Choi et al. 2017) conducted a study to investigate the fouling characteristics of colloidal silica in a direct-contact membrane distillation system. They also explored the use of mathematical models and an artificial neural network to predict the fouling rate. The research findings revealed that the concentration of silica, sodium chloride, and the feed temperature influenced the flux in the membrane distillation system. Among the models tested, the cake formation model provided the most accurate description of colloidal silica fouling under the experimental conditions, with R2 values ranging from 0.93 to 0.99. This suggests that the primary factor contributing to colloidal silica fouling is the formation of a cake layer on the membrane surface. Furthermore, the results obtained from the artificial neural network model demonstrated a strong correlation (R2 = 0.99) between the predicted and experimentally measured output variables, confirming the artificial neural network model's capability to accurately predict the rate of silica fouling in a membrane distillation system.
Mittal et al. (2021) studied the use of artificial neural networks in modeling the vacuum membrane distillation process. The researchers used MATLAB's Deep Learning Toolbox to develop an artificial neural network to analyze the effects of operating parameters on membrane fouling. The artificial neural network was optimized to achieve a minimum mean square error of 0.58 with ten nodes in the hidden layer. The model predictions were validated with a correlation coefficient of more than 0.98. The trained artificial neural network was then used to analyze the effects of operating conditions on flux and membrane fouling. High membrane fouling was observed at high feed temperature and vacuum tightness, while higher feed solute concentrations were also responsible for high fouling. The optimization study found that high feed temperature and moderate to high vacuum tightness for lower solute concentrations and high feed temperature and low to moderate vacuum tightness for higher solute concentrations were the optimum operating conditions to achieve maximum fluxes. This study contributes to the understanding of the effects of operating parameters on membrane fouling in vacuum membrane distillation processes.
Roehl et al. (2018) focused on modeling fouling in a large reverse osmosis system using artificial neural networks. The study utilized a six-year process database containing 59 hydraulic and water quality parameters, representing 190 runs between membrane cleanings. The fouling process was divided into two phases: phase 1 involved initial particle deposition, while phase 2 included gradual biofilm and scale growth. The artificial neural network models developed for each phase identified key predictors of fouling. For phase 1, the best predictors were total chlorine, electrical conductance, total dissolved solids, ammonia, and cartridge filter pressure drop. Phase 2 fouling was best predicted by turbidity, nitrate, organic nitrogen, nitrite, and total chlorine. These findings aligned with known fouling mechanisms in each phase. The study also demonstrated the use of the fouling indicator Pfoul, calculated from reverse osmosis system pressures, to reduce fouling rates by simulating different chlorine concentrations. The artificial neural network modeling approach proved valuable in understanding and predicting fouling mechanisms in the full-scale reverse osmosis system. This research provided insights into the factors influencing fouling in a large reverse osmosis system and highlighted the potential of artificial neural network models for monitoring and controlling membrane fouling in real-time. The use of a comprehensive, multi-year process database enabled the consideration of seasonal and year-to-year process variability, enhancing the accuracy of the models. The findings contribute to the ongoing efforts to mitigate fouling and improve the efficiency and performance of reverse osmosis systems in water treatment and desalination applications.
Park et al. (2019) developed a deep neural network (DNN) model for accurately predicting organic fouling growth and flux decline in nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membrane filtration systems. The study utilized high-resolution fouling layer images obtained from optical coherence tomography (OCT) as input data for training the deep neural network model. Compared to existing mathematical models, the deep neural network model demonstrated superior predictive performance. It achieved an R2 value of 0.99 and a low root mean square error (RMSE) of 2.82 μm for fouling growth simulation and an R2 value of 0.99 and RMSE of 0.30 L.m−2.h−1for flux decline simulation. These results indicate that the deep neural network model accurately simulated the complex behaviors of membrane fouling. The use of optical coherence tomography as a fouling monitoring device provided fine-scale data on the membrane surface, allowing real-time observation of fouling. However, optical coherence tomography has limitations in continuous monitoring and predicting future fouling behavior. The deep neural network model addressed these limitations by providing predictive information based on the obtained images. Overall, the study demonstrated that the data-driven approach using deep neural networks, specifically the advanced version known as deep neural networks, is a promising alternative for modeling membrane fouling and flux decline in high-pressure filtration systems. By leveraging large amounts of image data, the deep neural network model achieved higher predictive accuracy and can contribute to optimizing the operation of water treatment processes.
Shim et al. (2021) focused on the development of a deep learning model using long short-term memory (LSTM) to simulate the influence of natural organic matter (NOM) on nanofiltration systems. The goal is to predict variations in filtration performance and fouling growth, which are crucial for controlling membrane fouling in water treatment processes. To train the long short-term memory model, lab-scale membrane fouling experiments were conducted using four types of natural organic matter: humic acid, bovine-serum-albumin, sodium alginate, and tannic acid. Real-time 2D images of the cake layer formed on the membrane were obtained using optical coherence tomography (OCT). The experimental data, including permeate flux and fouling layer thickness, were used as input variables to train the long short-term memory model. The results showed that the long short-term memory model performed well in predicting permeate flux and fouling layer thickness, with root mean square errors of less than 1 L.m−2.h−1 and 10 μm, respectively, during both the training and validation steps. This demonstrates the capability of deep learning to simulate the influence of natural organic matter on nanofiltration systems and potentially other membrane processes. The research highlights the advantages of data-driven models, particularly deep learning, in predicting fouling behavior without relying on complex mathematical equations. The long short-term memory model's ability to analyze sequential events and consider temporal variations contributes to its improved prediction performance. However, further exploration and application of the developed model in industrial settings are needed to bridge the gap between experimental and modeling approaches in membrane research.
The study conducted by Niu et al. (2022) systematically reviewed the application of artificial intelligence techniques in predicting membrane fouling in the last 20 years. Various artificial intelligence algorithms, including artificial neural networks, search algorithms, fuzzy logic, genetic programming, and support vector machines, have been successfully used to predict membrane fouling in a variety of membrane-based processes. Over the past 20 years, artificial neural networks have emerged as the dominant algorithm for predicting membrane fouling in various membrane filtration systems. The working principle of artificial neural networks is flexible, allowing for the adjustment of the number of neurons in the input and output layers based on the variables involved. Due to its simplicity and accuracy, multilayer perceptron neural networks are widely used to simulate membrane fouling processes. It is noteworthy that radial basis function neural networks, characterized by a simple topology and faster computation speed, are more suitable for real-time prediction. A convolutional neural network algorithm, using fouling images as input variables, can be used to predict the thickness, porosity, roughness, and density of the fouling layer and to visualize the evolution of the fouling layer. So far, the application of artificial intelligence-based models to membrane fouling in forward osmosis and membrane distillation is still scarce, mainly relying on artificial neural networks. Although a single artificial intelligence method has demonstrated its powerful prediction potential, there are research gaps for the utilization of hybrid artificial intelligence algorithms to further improve the prediction capacity and accuracy of membrane fouling for membrane-based processes.
In terms of membrane performance, Hu et al. (2021) developed predictive methodologies for organic solvent nanofiltration (OSN) membrane performance using artificial intelligence. The study addresses the challenges in predicting the performance of organic solvent nanofiltration membranes due to the complex interactions between solvents, solutes, and membranes. Instead of relying on mathematical equations, the researchers compiled a large dataset with over 38,000 data points and employed artificial intelligence-based models for performance prediction. Through principal component analysis (PCA), the study identified the key parameters that significantly affect both the permeance and rejection of the membranes. The researchers trained three different artificial intelligence models, including artificial neural networks, support vector machines, and random forests, achieving high prediction accuracies of up to 98% for permeance and 91% for rejection. The findings of this research have important implications for data standardization, membrane design, and development. By utilizing artificial intelligence models, the industrial implementation of organic solvent nanofiltration can be fast-tracked, leading to improved process sustainability and efficiency. The study also highlights the need to overcome the challenges associated with predicting membrane performance in organic solvent nanofiltration, such as the diverse characteristics of solvents and the transient nature of nanofiltration membranes.
Liu et al. (2020a) aimed to predict the performance of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyethersulfone (PES), and polysulfone (PSf) filtration membranes using machine learning. The study collected a comprehensive dataset of 1895 vectors, encompassing variables related to composition, fabrication, and operation. Regression models were developed to predict the performance of the membranes in terms of permeability and selectivity, achieving coefficients of determination ranging from 0.79 to 0.85. Classification models were also constructed to distinguish membranes with superior performance. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) ranged from 0.94 to 0.97 for classifying the top 20% and top 50% membranes, respectively. The research further investigated the impact of experimental structural information, such as porosity, thickness, surface contact angle, and roughness, on the predictive models. Including this additional information resulted in significant improvements in the regression models. An algorithm was developed and released to facilitate the development of advanced filtration membranes through virtual experiments. By utilizing machine learning and data mining techniques, the research demonstrated the potential for predicting membrane performance based on various parameters, enabling the rational design of membranes with enhanced properties. These findings contribute to reducing the development cost associated with the trial-and-error approach, ultimately leading to the production of more efficient and cost-effective filtration membranes.
In another study, Lin et al. (2017) investigated the removal of copper, nickel, and cobalt ions from synthetic mining wastewater using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration and developed a Monte Carlo-based artificial neural network model to predict the micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration performance. The study examined the effects of surfactant-to-metal ratio and pH on metal rejection rate and permeate flux. The results showed that the model-predicted values agreed with experimental data, indicating the accuracy of the artificial neural network model. The surfactant-to-metal ratio and pH were found to have significant contributions to the metal rejection rate and permeate flux, with contributions ranging from 30 to 50%. Sampling time had a relatively lower contribution of 10%. The optimal conditions for micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration were determined to be a surfactant-to-metal ratio of 8.5 and a pH of 8–10, which resulted in rejection rates exceeding 99% for all three metals and compliance with Canadian environmental standards. During the experimental procedure, flux decrease, and concentration polarization effect were observed. The type of metal examined did not significantly affect micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration performance. Overall, the research concluded that the developed artificial neural network model could provide a valuable tool for predicting and understanding the micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration performance, while the Monte Carlo-based sensitivity analysis helped determine the relative importance of process parameters.
For removing biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) from polluted water, Zahmatkesh et al. (2022) aimed to assess the effectiveness of a novel ultrafiltration and mixed matrix membrane (MMM) composed of hydrous manganese oxide (HMO) and silver nanoparticles (Ag-NPs) in removing biological oxygen demand and chemical oxygen demand. The hydrous manganese oxide and silver nanoparticles content in the polycarbonate (PC) MMM was increased from 5 to 10%. A neural network was employed to compare PC-HMO and silver nanoparticles mixed matrix membranes. The mixed matrix membrane was evaluated in combination with hydrous manganese oxide and silver nanoparticle loadings to examine their effects on pure water flux, mean pore size, porosity, biological oxygen demand, and chemical oxygen demand removal efficacy. The artificial neural network model proved highly suitable for predicting biological oxygen demand and chemical oxygen demand removal. An ideal mixed matrix membrane model architecture was proposed with an optimal number of hidden layers (2 layers) and neurons (5–8 neurons). Experimental and predicted data showed strong correlations between the developed models. Biological oxygen demand was predicted with excellent R2 and low root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.99 and 0.05%, respectively, while chemical oxygen demand was predicted with excellent R2 and low RMSE of 0.99 and 0.09%, respectively.
In the case of the removal of dyes from water by using a membrane, Fetimi et al. (2021) focused on optimizing and predicting the removal of safranin-O cationic dye from aqueous solutions using the emulsion liquid membrane (ELM) technique. The study investigated various parameters, including surfactant content, internal phase concentration, dye concentration, and stirring speed, to determine their impact on dye removal. A total of 29 experiments were conducted. The researchers employed the response surface methodology (RSM) with Box–Behnken design (BBD) to optimize and predict the efficiency of the emulsion liquid membrane process. The optimized conditions resulted in 99.68% removal of Safranin-O within a contact time of less than 2 min. To forecast the removal of the dye, a novel approach combining an artificial neural network algorithm with particle swarm optimization (PSO) was proposed. The particle swarm optimization technique was used to determine the optimal parameter values for the artificial neural network. Overall, the study provided insights into optimizing the emulsion liquid membrane process for Safranin-O dye removal and demonstrated the effectiveness of the artificial neural network-particle swarm optimization hybrid model for predicting dye removal in aqueous solutions.
To assess the accuracy of artificial neural networks with other models in membrane assessment, Corbatón-Báguena et al. (2016) compared the performance of artificial neural networks with Hermia's models in assessing ultrafiltration of macromolecules using ceramic membranes. The multilayer perceptron artificial neural network was utilized, with operating parameters and dynamic fouling as inputs to predict permeate flux. The results showed that the artificial neural network simulations performed comparably to Hermia's models in terms of performance. Furthermore, the artificial neural network methodology demonstrated advantages in terms of computational speed, high accuracy, and ease of use compared to conventional mathematical models. The study highlighted the ability of artificial neural networks to learn and recognize trends in input and output data without prior assumptions, making them suitable for modeling complex nonlinear relationships. Previous applications of artificial neural networks in membrane technology have shown successful results in various filtration processes. In this research, the artificial neural network models accurately predicted permeate flux decline during crossflow ultrafiltration of macromolecules, providing a competitive, powerful, and fast alternative for dynamic ultrafiltration modeling.
Rall et al. (2020) tackled the challenge of optimizing membrane processes for cost-effective water treatment and disposal by integrating machine learning. Their proposed methodology combines artificial neural networks as surrogate models with deterministic global optimization, bridging the gap between nanoscale transport models and large-scale process design. The authors trained artificial neural networks using data from a one-dimensional extended Nernst-Planck ion transport model, extending it to a more accurate two-dimensional distribution for precise salt retention modeling. The open-source tools developed, encompassing process models and optimization solvers, enable resource-efficient multi-scale optimization in membrane science. The study underscores ion selectivity's importance in membrane technologies for sustainable water treatment and electrochemical processes. Despite the challenges in optimizing membrane transport, particularly in layer-by-layer nanofiltration, the research provides a novel approach. It suggests a hybrid methodology, combining data-driven surrogate models with mechanistic process models, to achieve multi-scale optimization and address the trade-off between computational efficiency and model fidelity. This integration of machine learning and mechanistic models offers insights into membrane synthesis and process design, enhancing water treatment and disposal practices.
For the improvement of gas separation using polymeric membranes, Hasnaoui et al. (2017) employed a regression model based on artificial neural networks to predict the permeability of oxygen, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen for different polymers. Their dataset included 27 rubbery polymers and 122 glassy polymers, with 80% of the data used for model training. (Yampolskii et al. 1998) group's contribution theory was utilized to obtain 21 descriptors for the artificial neural network model. This approach resulted in more accurate predictions by the artificial neural network model for polymers with significant gas permeability compared to those with lower gas permeability. Inaccuracies in predicting lower gas permeability were attributed to errors in experimental measurements.
In addition, machine learning methods have been utilized in the field of polymers to predict various properties, such as the glass transition temperature (Kim et al. 2019a), dielectric constants (Kim et al. 2016), gas permeability (Barnett et al. 2020b), and the discovery of novel functional polymers (Wu et al. 2019b). One commonly used model for predicting polymer membrane performance is group contribution theory, which breaks down the chemical structure of a polymer into smaller fragments and employs these fragments as input features in machine learning models. Hierarchical methods have also been reported for fingerprinting polymers to predict properties, which have proven valuable in establishing structure–property relationships (Hasnaoui et al. 2017; Zhu et al. 2020; Yuan et al. 2021).
However, the gas permeability of a given polymer is often measured under different conditions, such as varying solvent treatments or degrees of aging. Machine learning models based solely on polymer fingerprints struggle to distinguish between these different conditions. The Polymer Gas Separation Membrane Database contains data for the gas permeability of the same polymer tested under diverse conditions in different laboratories and with different instruments. Therefore, relying solely on the chemical structure is insufficient to fill in missing values for gas permeability. To address this issue, a study conducted by Yuan et al. (2021) focused on using machine learning to impute missing gas permeability data for polymer membranes, which have potential applications in energy-efficient gas separations. The researchers utilized machine learning to impute missing values in the database and validated their approach against gas permeability measurements not recorded in the database. The study suggests that once the permeability of carbon dioxide and/or oxygen for a polymer has been measured, it becomes possible to quantitatively estimate most other gas permeabilities and selectivities, including carbon dioxide/methane and carbon dioxide/nitrogen. This early insight into the gas permeability of a new system can aid in identifying promising polymer membranes at the initial stage of experimental measurements.
In the case of mixed matrix membranes, Guan et al. (2022) demonstrated that an online random forest model can be trained for membrane-based carbon capture, leading to high-performance mixed matrix membranes for carbon capture. The models are trained for metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), which help overcome the permeability-selectivity trade-off. Experimental data match well with model predictions, and knowledge transfer from carbon dioxide/methane to carbon dioxide/nitrogen enables efficient and resource-saving learning. The researchers first train random forest models on literature data on carbon dioxide/methane separation, identifying the optimal metal–organic framework structure with a pore size of more than 1 nm and a surface area of 800 m2g−1. Then, representative metal–organic frameworks are blended into Pebax-2533 and a polymer of intrinsic microporosity-1 to fabricate mixed matrix membranes. The membranes demonstrate carbon dioxide separation performances that agree well with model prediction and surpass the 2008 Robeson upper bound. Additionally, knowledge transfer from carbon dioxide/methane to carbon dioxide/nitrogen separations shows better agreement with literature data compared to direct modeling, enabling efficient and resource-saving machine learning. This work applies machine learning to address domain-specific issues and may provide insights for other membrane development projects.
Gasós et al. (2023) discussed the development of surrogate models based on artificial neural networks for the optimization of membrane-based carbon dioxide separation processes. The goal is to overcome the computational challenges associated with traditional optimization methods. The surrogate models are designed to generate a Pareto front, which represents the optimal trade-off between process-specific electricity consumption and productivity. The researchers successfully developed surrogate models that can quickly generate the Pareto front within 200 ms. These models consider various input data such as membrane material properties, feed composition, and separation targets. The applicability of the models is demonstrated by creating process performance maps specifically for post-combustion carbon dioxide capture. The process performance maps provide valuable insights into the achievable gas separation regions in terms of carbon dioxide recovery and purity. They also highlight the influence of membrane material, feed composition, and separation targets on the optimal operating conditions and Pareto fronts. The study highlights the potential of using artificial neural networks as surrogate models for the optimization of membrane-based gas separation.
In another study, Zhao et al. (2023) aimed to establish a quantitative structure–property relationship (QSPR) model for predicting the gas separation performance of polyimide membranes using artificial neural networks. A data bank of 125 polyimides was used, and 20 descriptors were calculated for each polyimide. The number of groups in each polyimide was taken as the network input, and gas permeability was the output. Two neural network models, back-propagation (BP) and genetic algorithm-optimized back-propagation (GABP), were compared for prediction accuracy. The results showed that the genetic algorithm-optimized back-propagation model outperformed previous models and other machine learning approaches, with a root mean squared error of 0.44 for carbon dioxide. The genetic algorithm-optimized back-propagation model was found to apply not only to polyimides but also to copolyimides. It demonstrated satisfactory prediction capability for polyimides' gas separation performance, which can guide the synthesis and structure screening of polyimides, leading to resource-saving and commercialization opportunities. This research contributes to the development of efficient and cost-effective methods for designing polyimides with optimized gas separation properties, thereby supporting efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change and energy security challenges.
Addressing the time-consuming and costly nature of polymer data for gas separation components is critical. In this regard, the Robeson upper bound serves as a well-known empirical criterion for selecting gas separation components. It illustrates the upper bound for permeability-selectivity relationships for various known polymers. Notably, polymers exceeding this upper bound are considered to have superior performance. However, manually recording polymer data through repetitive experiments is time-consuming and costly. Therefore, there is an urgent need for machine learning in this context. (Barnett et al. 2020a) trained a Gaussian process regression model to predict the performance of new polymers experimentally. To incorporate polymers into the machine learning model, a polymer fingerprinting algorithm was used to convert them into binary representations. This fingerprinting approach outperformed typical atom-type representations, as it efficiently accounted for chemical connectivity.
After rigorous testing and training using machine learning, polymers were accurately predicted based on data from the National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS) database. Over 11,000 polymers were screened, and more than 100 of them surpassed the Robeson upper bound. Further investigation revealed that polymers containing ether bonds, nitrogen rings, and sulfur groups were more likely to outperform other polymers, demonstrating a consistent physical pattern in the model's predictions (Yin et al. 2022). In conclusion, two polymers that exceeded the upper bound were successfully synthesized and tested.
Machine learning technology holds tremendous potential in the fields of membrane fabrication, permeability, and solute rejection. It offers a promising alternative to costly trial-and-error methods, ultimately improving the prediction of polymer features, streamlining membrane fabrication, and facilitating the development of novel polymers with a significant impact on membrane separation applications. Recently, artificial intelligence has gained prominence for its substantial role in optimizing various membrane applications, offering cost-effectiveness, ease of operation, highly predictable performance, and reduced energy consumption. Despite the significant benefits, there are also challenges associated with the application of machine learning in membrane design and discovery (L'Heureux et al. 2017, Barbiero et al. 2020, Molnar et al. 2020, Wang et al. 2020b, Maleki et al. 2022), as follows:
-
I.
Computational resources: Training and running machine learning models can be computationally intensive, requiring substantial computational resources and time. Access to high-performance computing infrastructure becomes essential for conducting comprehensive analyses and optimizing membrane systems efficiently.
-
II.
Availability and quality of data: Machine learning models rely on large, high-quality datasets for effective training. However, the availability of such datasets may be limited or even nonexistent for certain membrane systems. This lack of data poses a challenge in develo** an accurate and robust mode.
-
III.
Generalization: Models trained on specific datasets may struggle to generalize their predictions to new or unseen membrane systems. It is important to ensure that machine learning models can transfer knowledge and generalize well to different systems, enabling their broader application.
-
IV.
Interpretability: Some machine learning models lack interpretability, making it difficult to comprehend the underlying mechanisms behind their predictions. This lack of interpretability hinders the understanding of structure–property relationships, which is crucial for designing membranes with desired properties.
-
V.
Multi-scale interactions: Membrane processes occur at various scales, from molecular interactions to macroscopic behavior. Integrating multi-scale information into machine learning models poses a challenge due to the diverse nature of relevant data.
-
VI.
Transferability of models: Models developed for specific membrane materials or conditions may not easily generalize to different scenarios, impacting the broader applicability of machine learning in membrane design.
-
VII.
Hybrid model challenges: Integrating machine learning with traditional mechanistic models (hybrid models) requires overcoming compatibility issues and ensuring synergy for enhanced predictive capabilities.
Types of membrane technology
Membrane technology offers a diverse range of solutions to address the separation, filtration, and purification needs of various industries. This technology comprises various types, including reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, and pervaporation, as depicted in Fig. 3, with each tailored to specific applications and requirements. A deep understanding of these diverse technologies empowers industries to streamline their processes, conserve resources, and maintain the production of high-quality products. Furthermore, ongoing research and development in the field holds the promise of pioneering membrane technologies that will further enhance efficiency and sustainability across multiple sectors. These forthcoming technologies will play a pivotal role in improving the efficiency and sustainability of various industries, enabling them to meet the increasing demands for separation, filtration, and purification while minimizing resource consumption. Given its widespread applications in diverse fields, it is crucial to grasp the different types of membrane technology and their unique capabilities.
Reverse osmosis
Overview of the reverse osmosis process
Reverse osmosis plays a pivotal role in global desalination and water treatment. Its core purpose lies in generating clean water fit for purposes like agriculture, drinking, and various industrial applications, achieved by the efficient extraction of minerals, ions, and salts from the source water (McMordie Stoughton et al. 2013). Within the global desalination sector, reverse osmosis desalination plants take the lead, accounting for roughly 80% of all desalination facilities. This technology is particularly lauded for its effectiveness in purifying seawater and brackish water (Alsarayreh et al. 2020). Moreover, there has been a noteworthy trend toward the expansion of reverse osmosis plants, with certain facilities boasting a capacity exceeding 600,000 m3 of water daily (Coutinho de Paula and Amaral 2017). Recently, reverse osmosis has become an indispensable process for water production, and numerous membrane fabrication techniques have gained widespread adoption.
As a natural process, the feedwater passes through a semipermeable membrane, moving from the lower salinity solution to the higher salinity solution until reaching equilibrium (Kim et al. 2019b). The fundamental concept behind the reverse osmosis process involves applying pressure that exceeds the osmotic pressure, causing the feedwater to flow through the semi-permeable membrane toward the medium with lower salt concentration, leaving the concentrated salt on the feed side and producing freshwater (Pangarkar et al. 2011). Globally, reverse osmosis has secured the majority of the desalination market due to its straightforward process and lower energy consumption when compared to other thermal-based desalination technologies (Matin et al. 2019). The features of reverse osmosis play a pivotal role in determining both the cost and the performance of the process.
The performance of the reverse osmosis membrane process is defined by a crucial metric known as specific energy consumption, which is primarily dependent on various operating conditions, including feedwater salinity, intake and disposal infrastructure, recovery rate, and energy recovery systems (Karabelas et al. 2018). Reverse osmosis, with energy costs ranging from 2 to 4 kWh/m3, stands out as the most energy-efficient desalination technology, which is notably lower than other methods, making it highly regarded for this merit (Zarzo and Prats 2018; Matin et al. 2021). Furthermore, reverse osmosis demonstrates its effectiveness across a range of salinity levels, requires minimal space, and offers a straightforward and automated operation. Presently, reverse osmosis plants have capacities surpassing 60 metric tons per day, with an annual growth rate of 10–15%, resulting in a combined annual energy consumption of 100 terawatt-hours (Feria-Díaz et al. 2021). Importantly, the reduced energy consumption, coupled with advancements in system technologies, can lead to further cost reductions.
Figure 4 illustrates the functioning of a reverse osmosis water purification system, a technology extensively employed for the production of high-quality drinking water, particularly in regions characterized by arid or semi-arid conditions (Labella et al. 2021). These areas often face the challenge of source waters with elevated salinity concentrations. Reverse osmosis systems serve as effective solutions for this issue, as they excel at the removal of diverse impurities from the water source. The versatility of reverse osmosis systems is further emphasized by their capability to eliminate a broad spectrum of contaminants, such as dissolved solids, heavy metals, bacteria, viruses, and organic compounds. The merits of reverse osmosis systems extend beyond merely improving water quality. They go a step further by enhancing the taste and odor of the treated water. Additionally, they are adaptable and capable of meeting a wide array of water purification requirements. As a result, reverse osmosis systems play a crucial role in providing high-quality drinking water and addressing the distinct needs of various communities and regions.
The reverse osmosis desalination system comprises four subsystems, which are feed water pretreatment, high-pressure pump, membrane module, and permeate post-treatment (Shenvi et al. 2015). The pretreatment process is designed to eliminate suspended solids, microorganisms, colloidal matter, and other residuals that may result in scaling, fouling, and precocious membrane damage in consequence, optimizing the reverse osmosis process efficiency. The pretreatment process involves screening of feed water, filtration, coagulation/flocculation, pH adjustment, chlorination, ultrafiltration, and microfiltration. The choice of an appropriate pretreatment process depends on some parameters like reverse osmosis membrane requirements, feed water, and space availability (Hailemariam et al. 2020). Hence, the selection of the reaction monomer in interfacial polymerization can significantly impact the characteristics of nanofiltration membranes.
The pretreatment process has a substantial impact on membrane fouling in reverse osmosis. Fouling involves the unwanted deposition of substances within membrane pores or on their surface. Furthermore, fouling adversely affects the desalination process by increasing operational energy requirements and costs, as higher pressure is needed to maintain water flow, necessitating more frequent cleaning and reducing membrane lifespan. Membrane costs account for 13% of the total expenses (Anis et al. 2019). Membrane fouling is classified into inorganic fouling, organic fouling, colloidal fouling, and biofouling and can be efficiently diminished via the pretreatment process, except for biofouling, which needs further treatment via chlorination technique to deactivate the microbial growth in feed water.
Additionally, membrane fouling is significantly influenced by surface roughness; rougher surfaces are more susceptible to fouling as foulants adhere more easily to them than to smoother surfaces. To enhance fouling resistance, smoother membranes with a low negative charge and higher hydrophilicity are required (Hailemariam et al. 2020). High-pressure pumps supply the necessary pressure to push feedwater through the membrane, overcoming osmotic pressure. The required pressure varies depending on the feedwater type; for instance, it ranges from 17 to 27 bar for brackish water and from 55 to 82 bar for seawater (Al-Karaghouli et al. 2010). Hence, it is imperative to assess the quality of the feedwater to ensure appropriate pretreatment and pressure management.
Reverse osmosis plant involves pressurized pum** of feed water through a semi-permeable membrane to separate undesired materials while concentrating the stream (Mengesha and Sahu 2022). In the post-treatment process, the collected permeate was further subjected to pH adjustment or other steps such as re-carbonation, disinfection to restrict microbial growth, aeration to eliminate hydrogen sulfide, and degasification of carbon dioxide. Minerals enrichment can be done via chemical injection, for instance, calcium and magnesium.
Post-treatment is a vital process to prepare the treated water to meet the demands of water to be applied either in domestic or industrial fields. At the same time, membrane-cleaning agents and brine act as effluents that must be treated before being released into the ocean. However, chemical recovery is estimated to be economically unfavorable since the ratio between brine to chemicals is so huge. Additionally, chemicals must be diluted or neutralized to prevent damaging marine life (Shenvi et al. 2015; Skuse et al. 2021). Post-treatment mainly affects the operating costs depending on the productivity of clean water and the availability of sites for concentrate disposal.
Membrane materials and structures
There are various configurations for reverse osmosis membrane modules applied for large-scale plant applications, such as spiral wound modules, tubular, plate-and-frame, and hollow fiber, where the spiral wound module is the most prevalent membrane and an example of a conventional reverse osmosis process (Chung et al. 2014). Reverse osmosis typical types include cellulose acetate, thin-film composite, inorganic, and organic/inorganic hybrids (Zhao et al. 2021). Over 60 years ago, the first active membrane prepared for the reverse osmosis process was introduced by Reid and Breton (1959), a cellulosic acetate membrane using acetone as solvent via the phase inversion route. Cellulosic acetate membranes showed sufficient salt rejection at about 96%; nevertheless, the water permeance was extremely low at 0.03 L/m2/h/bar, which was inappropriate for practical applications.
For the aim of develo** water permeance without trading off salt rejection, Loeb and Sourirajan (1962) improved the membrane’s water permeance by increasing the porosity of the cellulose film via utilizing pore-forming monomers and successfully fabricated cellulose diacetate membrane having asymmetric morphology and water permeance 0.14 L/m2/h/bar besides 99% of salt rejection. However, cellulose diacetate membranes have drawbacks, including biological instability. Further development engendered cellulose triacetate membranes possessing higher biological, chemical, and thermal stabilities (Holloway et al. 2015), which surpass cellulose diacetate.
In terms of cross-section morphology, membranes are divided into two types: anisotropic (asymmetric) and isotropic (symmetric) membranes. Anisotropic membranes possess a heterogeneous composition in chemical composition and structure concurrently (Asad et al. 2020). Additionally, anisotropic membranes are categorized into composite membranes, for instance, self-assembled structures, thin-film and coated films, and phase-separation membranes known as Loeb-Sourirajan membranes (Nambikkattu et al. 2022), where composite membranes possess heterogeneous composition in chemical composition as well as structure. Unlike phase-separation membranes possess a homogenous chemical composition only, while the membranes' porosity, pore size, thickness, and structure differ from one to another (Buonomenna 2016; Duarte and Bordado 2016). On the other hand, isotropic membranes are remarked by the membranes’ homogeneous composition, where the structure is fabricated by any single material. Furthermore, isotropic membranes are divided into nonporous, macroporous, electrically charged, and dense film membranes (Lee et al. 2016). A breakthrough in membrane technology has been achieved with the evolution of anisotropic membranes.
Cellulosic membranes are characterized by having anisotropic structures comprised of an upper-skin layer located on a porous sublayer where both have identical chemical compositions. Interestingly, the filtration performance mainly relies on the acetylation degree. Higher acetylation surprisingly enhances selectivity but dwindles water permeability. The stability of cellulosic acetate membranes is at pH 4–6 (Yang et al. 2019c). Therefore, in acidic and basic medium, hydrolysis reaction will occur and decrease selectivity.
Cadotte (1981) accomplished a milestone by fabricating polyamide thin-film composite membranes through interfacial polymerization between m-phenylenediamine and trimesoyl chloride on microporous polysulfone support. Incredibly, the fabricated polyamide thin-film composite membranes surpass cellulosic acetate in water permeance, which is 0.73 L/m2/h/bar, and higher stability in acidic and basic medium but along with the same salt rejection of 99%. Moreover, the water permeance through thin-film composite membranes depends on the porous support layer features and the membrane surface’s hydrophilicity; meanwhile, the surface charge and polyamide structure govern the salt rejection (Burns et al. 1979). Fabrication of thin-film composite membranes is considered a groundbreaking success in the desalination market.
Although polyamide thin-film composite membranes have significant performance and are mostly utilized membrane in the desalination market owing to thin-film composite membranes’ astonishing salt rejection, mechanical strength, and water permeability, however, thin-film composite membranes face some challenges like low chlorine resistance and fouling (Zhao et al. 2021), while cellulosic acetate membranes still take part in a small market of desalination surpassing thin-film composite membranes in chlorine resistance with tolerance limit about 1 ppm (Shenvi et al. 2015). Nevertheless, many studies have been conducted for develo** thin-film composites for chlorine tolerance.
Therefore, the merits of organic polymers can be highlighted in their simple processability, cost-effectiveness, and good selectivity. Additionally, organic membranes play a huge part in the desalination marker with a remarked activity in academic research as well as industrial-scale applications (Kayvani Fard et al. 2018). Inorganic membranes show outstanding thermal and chemical stabilities along with remarkable mechanical strength (Vasanth and Prasad 2019). Inorganic membranes encompass carbon-based membranes and metal oxide membranes, where zirconia, titania, alumina, and their mixtures are widely commercialized in the market of metal-oxide membranes. Inorganic membranes share the same structure comprising a support with a macro-porous structure and a barrier layer with a micro- or mesoporous structure. Inorganic membranes are commonly utilized in systems with challenging conditions to polymeric membranes as utilizing corrosive effluents and elevated temperatures (Saikia et al. 2019; Wills et al. 2019). Interestingly, inorganic membranes surpass polymeric membranes in the industry.
The synthesis of inorganic membranes from a highly advanced porous material, for example, graphene oxides and carbon nanotubes, marked the inorganic membranes as the most auspicious membranes in thin-film technology. Inorganic membranes have many merits, such as magnificent permeability and considerable selectivity, besides an effective performance in desalination processes (Yang et al. 2019c). Despite the high costs of inorganic membranes in comparison with polymeric membranes, inorganic membranes have a potent capability to withstand incessant backwashing and harsh chemical cleaning, sterilize and autoclave, and resist elevated temperatures up to nearly 500 °C. Additionally, inorganic membranes have a stable and well-defined pore structure and a prolonged lifetime (Kayvani Fard et al. 2018). However, their expensive costs and rigidity are the prime demerits of inorganic membranes.
Kumakiri et al. (2000) reported the earliest work on reverse osmosis using zeolitic membranes for water/mixture separation. The thickness of the membrane was found to be 5 μm with 0.4 nm pore size, leading to 44% of ethanol rejection. Li et al. (2004) described the use of zeolitic membranes for water/mixture separation in desalination utilizing reverse osmosis, where salt rejection achieved 76.4%. The diminishing in rejecting salt ability with increasing ionic strength is ascribed to the existence of two different types of pores in the zeolitic membranes: zeolite channel and microporous intercrystal pores.
Finally, mixed matrix membranes provide a significant platform for improving performance and flux, in addition to offering better antimicrobial characteristics. Mixed matrix membranes elucidate a remarkable enhancement in surface hydrophilicity, anti-fouling, and robustness (Kayvani Fard et al. 2018). Several synthesis methods have been conducted for the incorporation of nanomaterials within a polymer matrix, including phase inversion, blending, self-assembly of nanoparticles, and interfacial polymerization (Yin and Deng 2015). Therefore, the enhancement of organic membrane performance was unsurprising via the incorporation of inorganic nanomaterials.
Kwak et al. (2001) investigated the impact of titania filles on carboxylate group properties that functionalized thin-film composite membranes, and the results elucidate the vital role of carboxylate groups in the adsorption of titania on thin-film composite membrane’s surface, which in turn generate remarkable anti-biofouling features, specifically under ultraviolet excitation. Although mixed matrix membranes acquire features of organic and inorganic membranes, the interface among the various materials can engender undesirable structures, therefore accompanied with difficulty in studying.
Advantages and challenges of reverse osmosis membrane technologies
Reverse osmosis membrane technologies have emerged as a highly effective method for water treatment and purification, offering numerous advantages in various applications. These membranes can remove a wide range of contaminants, producing high-quality water suitable for drinking, industrial use, and more. However, while reverse osmosis membranes provide significant benefits, they also present certain challenges that need to be addressed for optimal performance. Table 1 lists the advantages and challenges associated with reverse osmosis membrane technologies. Understanding these factors is crucial for harnessing the full potential of reverse osmosis membranes and advancing water purification techniques.
It is important to note that advancements in membrane technology and system design continue to address these challenges, improving the efficiency, reliability, and overall performance of reverse osmosis membrane technologies.
Nanofiltration
Overview of the nanofiltration process
Nanofiltration (NF) is a membrane separation approach that has gained interest recently due to its distinct capabilities and applications. It is considered the most vital process in recently developed industrial processes (Nath et al. 2018). In the second half of the 1980s, nanofiltration emerged as a separate pressure-driven membrane approach for the removal of color, organic matter, and hardness from drinking water sources (Rana and Matsuura 2010; Mohammad et al. 2015). Nanofiltration serves as a bridging solution between reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration (UF) by targeting solute particle sizes in between, as shown in Fig. 5. Consequently, nanofiltration membrane may be rightly considered as a very ‘tight’ ultrafiltration or a very ‘loose’ reverse osmosis membrane. This process effectively excludes solutes of approximately 1 nm in size. Nanofiltration operates by allowing selective passage of components through a semipermeable membrane under a pressure gradient between the retentate and permeate. As a result, it enables the purification of components within this molecular weight range while separating them from higher molecular weight substances (Abdel-Fatah 2018; Nath et al. 2018).
These astonishing features allowed nanofiltration membranes to be conducted in various applications, for instance, water treatment, the food industry, the medical field, and the textile industry (Du et al. 2022). Since the first introduction of nanofiltration membranes, continual optimization and development has been done for nanofiltration membranes, along with improving the separation capability via tuning the material composition and the structural characteristics of nanofiltration membranes (Guo et al. 2022). Commercial nanofiltration membranes are distinguished by having a fixed charge that evolved by dissociation of ionizable groups such as carboxylic groups and sulfonic acid groups (Shon et al. 2013), which can significantly generate charges on the surface of the membrane as well as inside the membrane pores.
Moreover, these ionizable groups can be acidic or basic or a merger of both, which remarkably rely on the utilized materials in the fabrication process. Many factors influence the dissociation of such groups, for instance, the pH of the contacting solution, since the membrane’s surface chemistry is labeled as amphoteric. Nevertheless, the membrane can exhibit an iso-electric point at a specific pH. Resulting of the valence ions and the fixed charges of the membrane, an inevitable electrostatic attraction or repulsion can take place. Two competing hypotheses explain the interaction’s nature of solving energy barrier mechanisms and image forces phenomena. The separation mechanism of solutes via nanofiltration membranes is mainly attributed to steric hindrance, in addition to Donnan and dielectric effects (Tul Muntha et al. 2017). Noticeably, those are the processes that highly cause the successful rejection of solutes during nanofiltration.
Membrane materials and structures
Nanofiltration membranes’ elective layer is identified with polymer chains possessing a three-dimensional network, where the filtration conductance is dominated by charges that exist on the layers and the pore size (Luo and Wan 2013). Several nanofiltration membranes have been developed in various separation techniques. Interestingly, many companies in the USA and Japan are pioneers in nanofiltration membrane commercialization (Aroon et al. 2010). However, various obstacles face nanofiltration membranes that need to be tackled for more utilization in demanding applications.
Apart from nanofiltration, membranes possessing molecular weight cut-offs lower than 500 Da are defined as tight nanofiltration, while nanofiltration membranes acquiring molecular weight cut-offs ranging from 500 to 2000 Da are known as loose nanofiltration, which has been employed in various applications such as sugar separation and polyphenol fractionation. Loose nanofiltration membranes have many characteristics, such as high separation selectivity toward smaller solutes, low salt rejection, and considerable permeability, which highlight loose nanofiltration as a promising membrane in resource recovery from wastewater and natural products. Tight nanofiltration membranes exhibit a stable performance and, therefore, are highlighted as broadly demanded in the desalination market. On the contrary, loose nanofiltration membranes are still limited in market demand (Guo et al. 2021). Thus, the development of the loose nanofiltration membranes’ performance must be done urgently to meet the augmentation of practical needs.
The composite membrane method is the most efficient method for synthesizing nanofiltration membranes, where an ultrathin dense layer is fabricated over the porous substrate to engender a composite membrane; additionally, various methods can be applied for the synthesis of nanofiltration composite membranes (Choi et al. 2009). Interfacial polymerization, which takes place at two different immiscible phases’ interfaces, has been commonly utilized. Moreover, the interfacial polymerization key is to decide the suitable reactant’s diffusion rate and to adjust the partition coefficient of the reactant in two phases to obtain the ideal densification degree (Tul Muntha et al. 2017). As a result, the choice of reaction monomer in interfacial polymerization can indeed affect the characteristics of nanofiltration membranes.
Thin film composite (TFC) structures are the most broadly utilized Poly(vinyl)alcohol membranes encompassing a thin polyamide (PA) layer with a highly porous substrate layer such as polyethersulfone or polysulfone, as well as nonwoven support (Lau et al. 2012), as listed in Table 2, where the polyamides are generated via applying interfacial polymerization reaction. Noticeably, the fabricated polyamide layer has a crucial role in the separation performance of membranes, which is unfortunately restricted by the trade-off between membranes’ selectivity and permeability (Yang et al. 2019b). To tackle such a drawback, several approaches were developed to enhance the separation efficiency of membranes.
For instance, the introduction of nanomaterials into the polyamide layers via utilizing interfacial polymerization reaction, producing thin film composite membranes (Lau et al. 2015). The inserted nanomaterials have introduced potent features like antimicrobial properties (Zhang et al. 2019); besides enhancing water permeability by creating huge nanochannels (Kim et al. 2019b), also, an effective method has also been developed via constructing an interlayer over the supported membrane to regulate the polyamide layer’s characteristics and enhance the membrane separation performance. The incorporated interlayer can efficiently facilitate the fabrication of a high-quality polyamide layer and boost the water flux in the polyamide layer by functioning as a highly permeable gutter layer (Guo et al. 2022). Therefore, the resulting synergistic effects can significantly enhance water permeability and solute rejection.
Since day one, cellulosic-nanofiltration membranes have been widely commercialized and utilized in water purification (Thakur and Voicu 2016). For instance, they were utilized to purify drinking water from organic micropollutants (Narbaitz et al. 2013) in addition to encountering low fouling of membranes owing to the cellulosic materials’ hydrophilicity. Nonetheless, cellulosic–membranes have a low bearing ability toward pH ranging from 2 to 8 and thermal change lower than 30 °C, resulting in limiting their applications (Lalia et al. 2013). Moreover, sulfonated polyethersulfone can be introduced as a rejection layer in some commercial nanofiltration membranes (Guo et al. 2022). As Zeng et al. (2017) reported, the presence of sulfonate groups can engender a negative charge on the membrane surface and, therefore, could aid in the rejection of anionic solutes with the aim of electrostatic repulsion. Table 2 lists some commercial membranes, along with their features and composition of selective top layer composition as defined by the manufacturer (Mohammad et al. 2015; Khairul Zaman et al. 2017).
Usually, there are two types of nanofiltration membranes: hollow-fiber membranes and flat-sheet membranes. Broadly, commercialized nanofiltration membranes are recognized as flat membranes as the composite membranes production process is only convenient for flat membranes. Noteworthy, commercial nanofiltration membranes are commonly fabricated via interfacial polymerization (Emonds et al. 2020). At the same time, hollow-fiber membranes have a potent ability to supersede flat membranes in the future. Owing to outstanding features of hallow-fiber such as filling density and highly specific areas (Jye and Ismail 2017). However, the complexity of the fabrication process of hallow-fiber membranes, as well as their poor mechanical strength, made them unsuitable for high-pressure separation (Turken et al. 2019). However, the lower working pressure can lead to diminished specific energy consumption as reverse osmosis membranes.
Ceramic membranes also have gained considerable interest owing to the superior chemical and physical stabilities of these membranes. The sol–gel method is the most widely utilized approach for the fabrication of ceramic membranes. Alumina, titania, and zirconia are generally utilized as a selective layer in nanofiltration ceramic membranes (Yang et al. 2019c). During the fabrication of ceramic membranes, alumina acquires low chemical stability therefore preferred to be combined with more stable oxides like zirconia. There are various types of crystal phases in alumina, like α-alumina and γ-alumina, which are commonly utilized in ceramic membrane fabrication. γ-alumina membranes are unstable in acidic medium and have pore sizes close to ultrafiltration; therefore, γ-alumina is mostly utilized in gas separation (Du et al. 2022). Nevertheless, commercialized ceramic nanofiltration membranes are limited.
Anisah et al. (2020) fabricated a nanofiltration membrane on porous α-alumina support at 200 ℃. Noticeably, the membrane’s pore size increased within elevating the sintering temperature up to 500 ℃. Additionally, for the development of ceramic membranes, microporous polymer frameworks have been introduced to alumina ceramic membranes to improve the organic solvent permeability. For instance, a previous study (Amirilargani et al. 2020) showed a reduction in the thickness of α-alumina membrane by 40 nm after modification via a porous organic framework, which in turn enhanced membrane permeability.
Advantages and challenges of nanofiltration membrane technologies
Nanofiltration membrane technologies have gained significant attention in various industries due to their unique capabilities in selective separation and water purification. These membranes offer several advantages, including selective removal of contaminants, high retention of divalent ions, moderate operating pressures, and versatility across different applications. Nanofiltration membranes are energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, and can enhance water quality by removing harmful substances. It is important to note that the specific advantages of nanofiltration membranes may vary depending on the application and the specific membrane properties. Analogous to reverse osmosis membranes, nanofiltration membrane has a strong separation capability toward small organic molecules and inorganic salts.
Interestingly, the key distinctive features of nanofiltration membranes are higher water flux than reverse osmosis membranes, low capability ranging from 10 to 30% for rejecting monovalent ions like sodium chloride, and a highly rejecting capability ranging from 80 to 100% for divalent ions such as sodium sulfate (Mohammad et al. 2015). Additionally, the nanofiltration process surpasses reverse osmosis in demanding lower operating pressure. However, nanofiltration is not suitable for the desalination of seawater, but more favorable to be involved in the pre-treatment step as a hybrid method (Matin et al. 2019). Over the years, the nanofiltration application range has extensively enlarged and been highlighted as a promising technology. However, challenges such as membrane fouling, limited salt rejection, pressure requirements, membrane material compatibility, trade-offs between permeability and selectivity, energy intensity, cost considerations, and scaling/mineral precipitation need to be addressed for optimal performance and widespread adoption. Nanofiltration membranes proved their significant potential in wastewater treatment that is noteworthy to be applied. Unfortunately, the membrane fouling results in instabilities in operation that limit their applications. Also, many studies have been conducted for water recovery via nanofiltration membranes (Van der Bruggen et al. 2008), but in most cases, membrane fouling was the biggest potent issue that was vastly studied. Moreover, the concentration of the wastewater to be treated is another issue. Overcoming these challenges requires ongoing research and development efforts to improve membrane design, fouling control strategies, and system operation and maintenance practices. By capitalizing on the advantages and addressing the challenges, nanofiltration membrane technologies have the potential to revolutionize water treatment, industrial processes, and resource recovery. Addressing these challenges requires ongoing research and development efforts, technological advancements in membrane materials and designs, improved fouling control strategies, and optimized system operation and maintenance practices. Table 3 lists the advantages and challenges associated with nanofiltration membrane technologies.
Pervaporation
Overview of the pervaporation process
Pervaporation, another membrane process, has gained prominence as a powerful desalination technique. Kober invented pervaporation in 1917 when he discovered the selective permeation of water from albumin and toluene aqueous solutions employing films (Wang et al. 2013). Since that time, pervaporation has been investigated, eventually leading to its industrialization through the adoption of membrane manufacturers and the operation of pervaporation-hybrid processes. Pervaporation is widely recognized for its capacity to split binary or multi-component azeotropic mixtures by selective partial vaporization (Castro-Munoz et al. 2020), where the liquid mixtures are separated using molecular-sieving porous or dense membrane and vaporize downstream (Wang et al. 2015). However, the fabrication of pervaporation membranes having long-term stability and high performance is still a bottleneck step.
The mass transfer through pervaporation membranes is defined in three steps: (i) depending on the chemical affinity of the target molecules absorbed into the membrane’s selective layer, (ii) diffusion of the molecules across the membrane in the vapor phase by the concentration gradient, (iii) desorption of vaporized molecules at the permeate side (Castro-Muñoz 2020). However, key operating parameters can influence its efficiency and selectivity. For instance, temperature plays a crucial role as it affects the vapor pressure and diffusion rate of the components (Trifunovic et al. 2006; Valentínyi et al. 2013). Higher temperatures generally enhance permeation rates but can also alter membrane selectivity. Feed composition, pressure, and membrane thickness are other variables that can be adjusted to optimize the separation performance. The choice of operating conditions depends on the specific application and the desired separation objectives.
Membrane materials and structures
Pervaporation membranes can be categorized into groups depending on the type of material utilized in the membrane: organic-permeable membranes and water-permeable membranes (Liu and ** 2021a). Organic-permeable membranes are fabricated from hydrophobic materials and utilized for solvent recovery from solvent–water mixture or selective separation of solvent utilizing their membrane’s different affinities. At the same time, water-permeable membranes are labeled as hydrophilic and utilized for solvent dehydration (Peng et al. 2021). Commonly, a higher feeding temperature ranging from 50 to 90 °C and applying vacuum on the permeated side are often required to elevate the driving force (Liu and Kentish 2018). The membrane’s affinity toward a specific organic solvent over the other is a controlling factor in the separation process besides the withstanding of membranes in the solvent.
As earlier mentioned, membrane modules are categorized into four groups: plate-and-frame, tubular hallow-fiber, and spiral wound modules. Interestingly, plate-and-frame modules predominate the pervaporation process as they acquire flexible and simple configurations for cleaning, maintenance, and assembly. However, some drawbacks limit plate-and-frame module large-scale applications in the industry due to highly expensive costs and low packing density. Furthermore, a non-uniform flow path in a plate-and-frame module can generate an irregular mass transfer and premature fouling (Pal 2020). On the contrary, tubular modules have a high crossflow rate and uniform pathway. However, the highly expensive fabrication costs, low packing density, and hardness in encapsulation make them also as same as plate-and-frame modules (Brüschke 2006). Therefore, tubular modules are also inconvenient in industrial applications.
Recently, the spotlight shifted toward hallow-fiber and spiral wound modules, which considerably with lower fabrication costs and higher packing density. Since the pervaporation mainly includes phase change, hollow-fiber, and spiral-wound modules guarantee efficient flow in narrow channels of permeation and low-pressure loss. Spiral wound and hallow-fiber modules have been commonly recognized in the industrial field, and their a crucial role in large-scale applications (Lu et al. 2022a). Overall, the industrialization of pervaporation modules greatly relies on the module configurations and fabrication of effectively performing pervaporation modules.
Various types of membranes have been developed for pervaporation, such as polymers, ceramics, and mixed matrix membranes. Polymer membranes have been scrutinized as an auspicious membrane material for efficient dehydration of various organic mixtures, for example, ethylene glycol–water (Sun et al. 2015), acetone–water (Mangindaan et al. 2015), carboxylic acid–water (Sikander et al. 2022) and alcohol-water (Bolto et al. 2015) study that proved the outstanding impact of embedding silicon dioxide into polyethersulfone on boosting the membrane’s hydrophilicity. In addition, the fouling of the calcium chloride-modified polyethersulfone/polyethylene glycol membranes was less than the neat polyethersulfone membrane.
The separation efficiency of the fabricated membranes was examined toward anionic dyes (Congo red and Orange II) and cationic dyes (methylene blue and crystal violet), denoted that the optimal calcium chloride proportion was 10 wt.%. This calcium chloride proportions showed superior filtration properties of rejection and flux owing to its smaller pore size of 3.6 nm and plentiful negative charges on the surface (21.8 mV). Noteworthy, the unmodified polyethersulfone/polyethylene glycol membrane revealed the highest rejection and least permeability compared to the modified membranes, which inferred the inappropriateness of the unmodified membrane for dye separation. This conclusion was consistent with Idris et al. (2007). Accordingly, embedding inorganic particles into the membrane matrix could develop the characteristics of membrane hydrophilicity, mechanical durability, and water flux, which drastically improve the separation performance and fouling resistance.
In another investigation, Albatrni et al. (2021) attained a superb removal % of mercury (II) of 99% using a polyvinyl amine ultrafiltration membrane. Such promising results are due to the potent interactions between mercury (II) and the active species of the as-fabricated membrane; (i) the plentiful amine groups of the membrane could bond to mercury (II) via outer-sphere complexation. (ii) The possible coordination bond between amine groups and mercury (II), which is the predominant mechanism based on the results of conductometric titration. Expectingly, the existence of sodium chloride and sodium sulfate affects the rejection percentage of mercury, where the rejection % attained 90% when their concentrations were 5000 and 650 mg/L, subsequently. While the over-increasing in the sodium chloride concentrations to 250,000 mg/L, gives rise to a decline in the mercury rejection % to 50%. This performance is most probably because of the resultant mercuro-chloro complex.
In conclusion, membrane technology is a promising solution to overcome the notorious contaminates from wastewater, such as dyes and heavy metals that are drained from bountiful industries. The interaction mechanism between the membrane and pollutants controls the efficacy of the removal process. Nevertheless, the size of membrane pores limits the use of this technology in some cases since the pollutants could penetrate through these loose pores. Accordingly, pioneering research papers have targeted fabricating a loose nanofiltration with a pore size larger than nanofiltration and lower than ultra-filtration.
Removal of nutrients
Indubitably, the nutrient existence in drinking water harmfully influences human health since it causes deterioration of blood cells and the intestine, as well as kidney and liver failure. Consequently, continuous investigations have been executed to outdo the jeopardy of these detrimental pollutants. Interestingly, membranes have disclosed individual capability in removing nutrients.
Growing attention is being directed toward forward osmosis membrane technology, which is considered a promising method for a membrane process with low fouling. It is also seen as a novel approach for the extraction and retrieval of nutrients from wastewater and sludge (Jafarinejad 2021). In this regard, Zhang et al. (2014) investigated the feasibility of using a forward osmosis dewatering process for nutrient recovery from source-separated urine. The filtration process showed high water fluxes of up to 20 L/m2.h when the active layer faced the feed solution. The rejection rates for neutral organic nitrogen (urea-nitrogen) in fresh urine were relatively low, but improved rejection rates were observed for ammonium (50–80%) in hydrolyzed urine and phosphate and potassium (> 90%) in most cases. Compared to the simulation based on the solution-diffusion mechanism, higher water flux, and solute flux were obtained using fresh or hydrolyzed urine as the feed, attributed to intensive forward nutrient permeation. The study concluded that the forward osmosis process was cost-effective and environmentally friendly for nutrient recovery from urban wastewater at the source.
In another study, Jafarinejad et al. (2019) aimed to concentrate ammonium in wastewater using a surface-modified nanofiltration membrane operating in forward osmosis mode. The modified membranes showed improved ammonium rejection rates. For synthetic ammonium solutions, the rejection rate was greater than 99% for the modified membranes compared to 75.5% for the original membranes. When treating real wastewater, the rejection rate declined to 89.3% but still showed significant improvement compared to the virgin membrane. The surface modification of the membranes involved grafting polyethylenimine on the polyamide thin film composite membrane using dicyclohexylcarbodiimide as a cross-linking agent. The modified membranes exhibited improved water flux and reduced reverse solute flux for certain ions. Overall, the study demonstrated the potential of polyethylenimine-modified membranes for the concentration and reuse of ammonium from wastewater sources.
Teoh et al. (2022) focused on using membrane distillation for water purification and nutrient recovery from aquaculture wastewater. The study found that the polyvinylidene fluoride membrane with micro-structures exhibited excellent superhydrophobic properties with a water contact angle of 153.3°. The continuous separation and treatment of fish farm wastewater showed a small and steady flux reduction of 1.4 kg/m2·h, indicating low fouling. The batch process of feed concentration achieved a water recovery of 86.3%, with the retentate concentration of fish farm water being at least five times higher than the initial concentrations of ammonia (16.4 to 82.2 mg/L), phosphate (18.0 to 99.8 mg/L), and potassium (68.0 to 384.8 mg/L). The rejection of all selected inorganic substances, except for ammonia (> 86%), was higher than 99%. These findings demonstrate the potential of membrane distillation for simultaneous water reclamation and nutrient recovery in aquaculture wastewater treatment.
Nie et al. (2023) focused on the development of a composite functional particle-enhanced gravity-driven ceramic membrane bioreactor (GDCMBR) for the simultaneous removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from groundwater. The gravity-driven ceramic membrane bioreactor demonstrated efficient removal of ammonia nitrogen and phosphorus during a 60-day operation. The obtained effluent quality showed phosphorus levels below 0.05 mg/L and no detectable ammonia nitrogen. The ripening period for nitrogen and phosphorus removal was shortened to 10–15 days. The gravity-driven ceramic membrane bioreactor exhibited enhanced bacteria enrichment and sustained biological activity within the bioreactor. Nitrifying bacteria (Nitrospira) and denitrifying phosphorus-accumulating bacteria (Exiguobacterium and Pseudomonas) were present in the biofilter for nutrient removal. The gravity-driven ceramic membrane bioreactor flux dropped to 9.8 L/m2.h due to microorganism accumulation on the membrane. The composite functional particle-enhanced gravity-driven ceramic membrane bioreactor demonstrated the potential to be an effective water treatment technology.
In one assessment considering the removal and recovery of phosphate, Anticó et al. (2021) developed a cellulose triacetate membrane via a double modification. The first modification step (surface medication) by Aliquat 366, while the second step (core modification) is by introducing nanoparticles into the matrix of cellulose triacetate. It was concluded that the removal of phosphate by magnetite-modified cellulose triacetate membrane attained 100%. Nonetheless, both silicon dioxide and titanium dioxide did not reveal a modification in the removal aptitude of phosphate. Also, Wang et al. (2016c)’s study elucidated the low affinity of the silicon dioxide-doped nanofiber membrane toward phosphate in which the adsorption capacity was 2.4 mg/g while adding zirconium acetate incremented the adsorption capacity of phosphate to 45.8 mg/g.
In another study, Karthikeyan et al. (2019) modified the chitosan membrane by lanthanum do** for the adsorptive removal of phosphate and nitrate. The experimental work indicated that the superb affinity of lanthanum-modified chitosan since maximal removal efficacy of nitrate and phosphate attained 62.6 and 76.6 mg/g, subsequently. These auspicious findings may be due to the powerful columbic interactions between the positive active species (lanthanum ion (La3+), ammonium ion (NH3+), and hydronium ion (OH2+)) in an acidic medium and both anions. In addition to the possible ion exchange between chloride ions and the anions, which was confirmed by the energy-dispersive X-ray pattern that showed a significant decline in the chloride percentage after the adsorption processes. In this context, ** membranes by embedding metal–organic frameworks boosted the removal rate of nutrients and the recyclability of membranes.
Removal of pathogens
Indeed, disposing of harmful materials in wastewater grows enormous types of pathogens, such as viruses, bacteria, and so on. These organisms give rise to many health issues, including meningitis, polio, diarrhea, encephalitis, and hepatitis (Goswami and Pugazhenthi 2020). Notably, the separation of bothersome pathogens using membrane filtration technology, whether with pre-treatment or without, is a practical choice to overcome this actual hazard. In this context, numerous membrane configurations have been fabricated and developed. Among them, hollow polyvinylidene fluoride was utilized to separate coliphage MS2 from wastewater (Huang et al. 2012). The adsorption probability of viruses onto membranes may be the controlling factor in the virus’s removal, even in the case of using a membrane with looser pores compared to the virus size. The experimental work revealed the fast adsorption of MS2 onto polyvinylidene fluoride during a filtration time of around 6–30 min, and the permeate throughput was 27 L/m2. Also, Van Voorthuizen et al. (2001) separated MS2 using a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane but showed a higher permeate throughput attaining 1250 L/m2.
In another study, Sundaran et al. (2019) designed a graphene oxide-incorporated polyurethane membrane for removing coliform from water bodies. It was concluded that the poor antibacterial activity of polyurethane membrane toward Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Interestingly, the incorporation of graphene oxide into the membrane dramatically boosted the antibacterial action of polyurethane. This observation owes to the nanosheets of graphene oxide that could attach pathogens, as well as the direct contact mechanism and potent oxidative stress of graphene oxide. The contact between bacteria and the modified membrane resulted in the collapse of the bacterial cells and the leaking of the cytoplasm (Liu et al. 2018). The elevation in the graphene oxide amounts from 1 to 10% fostered the antibacterial action of the membrane from 70 to 90% for S. aureus and 95% for E. coli. The antibacterial membrane possesses many features in water remediation since it could prevent growing bacteria on the membrane’s surface and also inhabit the biofilm formation, decreasing the fouling of the membrane (Zhu et al. 2018). Consequently, the antibacterial graphene oxide-incorporated polyurethane membrane has excellent antifouling and filtration characteristics.
Xu et al. (2012) fabricated an antibacterial membrane by immobilizing copper nanoparticles into a polyethyleneimine-deposed polyacrylonitrile membrane. The leaching amount of copper from the membrane was detected via atomic absorption spectrophotometric, showing the stability of copper ions since the leaching concentration was 1.13 mg/L in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid solution during the first 4 h, then after no leaching was observed. More importantly, the antibacterial efficacy of the copper-doped membrane and the neat membrane against E. coli was 71.5% and 14.5%, respectively. Also, copper-doped chitosan/polyethylene oxide/TEMPO-oxidized cellulose membrane exhibited a favorable bacterial removal rate of about 100% against E. coli and Bacillus subtilis (Bates et al. 2021). In addition to the excellent bactericidal property of the copper-embedded membrane attained 1.98% for E. coli and 25.57% for B. subtilis, as well as its auspicious bacteriostatic property where the diameter inhibition zone in the case of E. coli was 2.9 mm and 6.5 mm in the case of B. subtilis.
Szczuka et al. (2020) evaluated the effectiveness of forward osmosis-reverse osmosis (FO-RO) hybrid systems in removing pathogens from challenging water sources, such as reverse osmosis concentrate, graywater, and filtered sewage, for centralized and decentralized potable reuse applications. The study found that forward osmosis-reverse osmosis treatment achieved high removal rates of pathogens. In the case of bacteriophage MS2, a surrogate for viruses, forward osmosis-reverse osmosis treatment achieved a removal rate of ≥ 6.7 − log when spiked into graywater and sewage. Native E. coli in graywater and sewage was also effectively removed, with ≥ 5.4 − log and 7.9 − log removal, respectively. However, it was noted that the detection of MS2 and E. coli in the forward osmosis-reverse osmosis permeates indicated the need for additional disinfection. Despite the high rejection of pathogens, the study suggested that additional disinfection steps should be implemented to ensure complete pathogen removal.
In another research study, Pazouki et al. (2022) investigated the efficacy of two low-energy dilution desalination processes, namely osmotic dilution desalination and mixing dilution desalination, in removing pathogens from seawater. The study used real seawater and recycled wastewater as influent sources and assessed the removal efficacy of bacterial indicators (Clostridium perfringens and E. coli), coliphage genera Microviridae, and Human adenovirus (HAdV) in each membrane configuration. The results showed that both forward osmosis and ultrafiltration membranes were effective in removing viruses, with the forward osmosis membrane achieving a removal rate of 5.1 log10 and the ultrafiltration membrane achieving 4.1 log10 removal. Additionally, no trace of bacterial indicators was found in the reverse osmosis permeate from either the forward osmosis-reverse osmosis or ultrafiltration-reverse osmosis configurations. Comparing the two membrane configurations, the forward osmosis membrane demonstrated slightly better pathogen log removal values (LRVs) than the ultrafiltration membrane. The forward osmosis membrane achieved a 5.0 LRV for viruses and a 4.2 LRV for bacterial indicators, while the ultrafiltration membrane achieved LRVs of 3.7 and 3.6 for viruses and bacterial indicators, respectively. The study also found that dilution desalination, through both osmotic dilution desalination and mixing dilution desalination processes, resulted in a reduction in the concentration of organic pathogen contaminants in the influent feed waters. Moreover, most bacterial indicators detected in the reverse osmosis permeate were nonpathogenic strains, as indicated by comparative 16S rRNA sequencing. Overall, this research demonstrates that hybrid forward osmosis-reverse osmosis or ultrafiltration-reverse osmosis processes can effectively remove pathogens from seawater, with the forward osmosis membrane showing slightly better performance in pathogen removal compared to the ultrafiltration membrane. These findings contribute to the understanding of pathogen removal efficacy in seawater dilution desalination processes, which is crucial for ensuring the safety of water reuse and addressing water scarcity challenges.
Olivares Moreno and Altintas (2022) developed a highly efficient membrane system for the removal of waterborne pathogens, with a specific focus on the removal of adenoviruses. Adenoviruses are particularly challenging to eliminate from water sources due to their resistance to common purification methods such as ultraviolet irradiation and chlorination. The study successfully addressed this challenge by creating a bioselective polyethersulfone (PES) membrane through a combination of chitosan hydrophilic surface modification and the immobilization of adenovirus-specific molecularly imprinted nanoparticles (nanoMIPs). The membrane demonstrated excellent virus removal capabilities, successfully separating 99.99% of the viruses from the water samples. This high removal efficiency was achieved by the specific binding of the adenoviruses to the immobilized nanoMIPs on the membrane surface.
Cordier et al. (2020) focused on the removal of pathogens from seawater using ultrafiltration, with a specific emphasis on shellfish production. The study targeted two pathogens: Vibrio aestuarianus and Ostreid herpesvirus 1 (OsHV-1). The objective was to produce high-quality water for shellfish production by evaluating the retention of these microorganisms through ultrafiltration. The results showed that ultrafiltration was effective in removing the targeted pathogens. For OsHV-1, in vivo experiments using oyster spat and larvae, which are highly susceptible to the virus, validated the protection of oysters. Oysters raised in contaminated seawater that were subsequently treated by ultrafiltration showed similar mortality rates to the negative controls. Regarding Vibrio aestuarianus, ultrafiltration achieved a high retention of the bacteria in seawater, with concentrations below the detection limits of the analytical methods used. The quantity of Vibrio aestuarianus was at least 400 times lower than the threshold known to induce mortalities in oysters. Industrial-scale experiments over several months further confirmed the retention of Vibrio bacteria. The study also demonstrated the stability of the ultrafiltration process over time, even in the presence of algal blooms. These findings have implications for the improvement of water quality in aquaculture and the prevention of diseases that can affect shellfish populations. Thus, ultrafiltration is a validated method for the treatment of seawater, effectively removing targeted pathogenic microorganisms and contributing to the biosecurity of shellfish production.
Accordingly, excessive assessments have been performed to engineer membranes with outstanding antimicrobial action and filtration properties. Antimicrobial membranes imply a promising removal rate for many pathogens. Notably, do** excellent antibacterial materials, like graphene oxide, copper, etc., in the membrane matrix enhanced the antibacterial action of some polymeric membranes.
Gas separation
Gas separation from gas/vapor mixture is a requisite process to fulfill the specific requirements of a product with high quality (Abetz et al. 2006). For this purpose, diverse conventional separation approaches have been applied, such as evaporation, drying, distillation, and absorption. Nonetheless, these separation ways consume excessive energy, reaching about 10–15% of the total consumed world’s energy (Sholl and Lively 2016). Some of these strategies, like adsorption-absorption and cryogenic distillation, are not energy-consuming, but they generate high pollution (Baker 2002). Membrane technology has revealed advantageous features in separating gas/vapor mixtures, including eco-friendly merit, facile scale-up and operation, small footprint, cost competitiveness, and modularity (Baker 2012, Peng et al. 2012). Additionally, gas separation by membrane process consumes merely 90% of the traditional approaches to gas separation (Sholl and Lively 2016).
Carbon dioxide separation
Carbon dioxide’s capture from fuel and combustion flue gases is an imperative requirement for alleviating the inevitable economic and environmental effects of carbon dioxide on climate change. Separation of carbon dioxide via membrane strategy surpasses the other ways, such as physical and chemical absorption processes, owe to operational ease, low depleted energy, and outdoing the limitations of thermodynamics solubility. Noteworthy, membranes acquire vast consideration in stationary power applications since they could be applied in the stream processing during oxo-combustion, pre-, and post-combustion, separating oxygen/nitrogen, carbon dioxide/hydrogen, and carbon dioxide/nitrogen gas pairs, respectively (Alivisatos and Buchanan 2010; Merkel et al. 2010). During the post-combustion, the used membrane is designed downstream of the combustion to separate the lower-pressure carbon dioxide from nitrogen. The higher-pressure carbon dioxide is separated from syngas via pre-combustion. For producing highly pure oxygen, oxo-combustion is applied and ultimately generates the water stream and carbon dioxide with high concentrations, which would be compressed and dehydrated (Valappil et al. 2021). Hence, designing membranes with high carbon dioxide permeability is an essential target for large-scale separation processes. In this context, Duan et al. (2021) fabricated varied metal–organic frameworks-decorated polymeric membranes for air separation. The experimental works exhibited the oxygen/nitrogen selectivity of MIL-101, Cu-BTC, MOF-5, MIL-53, ZIF-67, UiO-66, and ZIF-8 was in the range of 5.4–22.2, while their oxygen permeability was between 4.1 × 104 and 5 × 105 Barrer. Despite these auspicious results, the metal–organic framework membranes suffer reproductivity and incomplete membrane/support intergrowth, agreeing with Venna and Carreon (2015). Thence, metal–organic frameworks were used as fillers to foster the gas separation efficiency of pristine polymers that have pretty low oxygen permeability and selectivity (Murali et al. 2013). Surprisingly, the maximal oxygen/nitrogen selectivity of the metal–organic framework/polymer membrane was about 19.8, and the oxygen permeability attained 2710.8 Barrer.
Hydrogen separation
Currently, numerous hydrogen recovery approaches are immensely exploited, comprising pressure swing adsorption, cryogenic distillation, and membranes (Perry et al. 2008; Thomassen et al. 2010). Notably, the membrane strategy is better than other approaches for separating hydrogen from a gas mixture due to its energy saving and high purity of the yielded hydrogen (Thomassen et al. 2010). Additionally, both pressure swing adsorption and cryogenic distillation demand doubled unit and supplemental wash column for eliminating the attached carbon mono/dioxides (Perry et al. 2008). The membrane separation strategy works by permeating the hydrogen gas through the membrane, kee** the other gases mixture in the feed. Nonetheless, such a process needs the recompression of hydrogen for transportation and utilization. Thence, the membrane separation requires further equipment, energy, and cost. Accordingly, researchers have endeavored to scrutinize membranes to retain the smaller molecules of hydrogen gas and pass the larger molecules, which dissolves the recompression drawback of the membrane (Dong et al. 2013). Although sustained investigations have been performed to enhance the permeance and selectivity of membranes, most of these research studies are suitable only for lab-scale (Choi et al. 2010). Hence, it is urgent to develop the permselectivity and mechanical properties of membranes for efficient hydrogen separation.
In one attempt, Zhang and Koros (2017) focused on improving the permselectivity of the membrane by incrementing the carbonization temperature. It was noticed that a dramatic enhancement in the selectivity from 3 to 11, corresponding to elevating the carbonization temperature from 750 to 900 °C, respectively. Nevertheless, the hydrogen permeability drastically dwindled from 1600 to 240 Barrer. Hence, a larger membrane area is required to overcome this gas permeance reduction, which increases the operational cost more than the saved cost by raising the permselectivity of the membrane. Furthermore, Lei et al. (2021) fabricated a carbon membrane for the selective separation of hydrogen from the carbon dioxide/hydrogen gas mixture. The experimental results exhibited the promising separation property of the as-prepared carbon membrane where the hydrogen permeance reached 111 units, with a selectivity of about 36.9 at 110 °C and 10 bar. More importantly, the membrane revealed excellent stability in the existence of humidified gas at a pressure of 14 bar and temperature of 90 °C.
In conclusion, the membrane separation strategy possesses promising merits, surpassing other gas separation methods owes to its eco-friendly, easy operation, modularity, cost competitiveness, energy saving, and small footprint. The developed membranes exhibited outstanding separation performances toward many gases, such as hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide, as elucidated in Table 7. Recently developed polymeric membranes for gas separation. Comparison between the gas permeability of various polymeric membranes. Recent studies deduced that the high carbon dioxide permeability using polymeric membranes reached about 1000 Barrers. In addition, excellent oxygen separation using membrane technology. Hydrogen separation via membrane strategy demonstrated outstanding results compared to other methods.
Energy applications
Sustaining life on our planet mainly relies on the presence of sufficient energy. Especially the recent situation of climate change and the ozone layer imposes finding clean modes for energy production instead of the common fossil commodities. There has been an obvious decline in the use of fossil fuels in the past few years; nevertheless, it is still the vastest energy generation form. Overmuch attempts from scientists around the world to find eco-friendly alternatives to fossil fuel because of its certain jeopardies on human health that were scientifically confirmed. In addition to the unstable prices of fossil fuel, it causes economic crises in the countries. Interestingly, some alternatives have been shined lately owing to their efficacy and eco-friendly merits, as will be explained in the following.
Fuel cell
Amongst the propitious alternative energy modes are fuel cells, which have acquired attention due to their high efficiency in energy generation/storage with zero pollution since it does not emit the common contaminants of fossil fuel (Qiu et al. 2019). Nonetheless, the high cost of the used materials in fuel cells and the expensive operation cost hinder the applicability of fuel cells (Ogungbemi et al. 2019). Generally, fuel cells are classified based on their size and structure, polymer electrolyte membrane properties, and operative environment. The fuel cell modes are categorized into proton exchange membrane, direct alcohol, anion exchange membrane, molten carbonate, solid oxide, phosphoric acid, and proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) (Hashim et al. 2009). Significant attention has been drawn toward PEMFCs, renowned for their remarkable hydrogen energy efficiency, captivating the interest of numerous experts, as illustrated in Fig. 7 (Li et al. 2023a, b). In recent times, substantial advancements have been achieved in this domain. PEMFCs are regarded as exemplary energy storage devices due to their superior operational features and absence of pollution, setting them apart from conventional fuel cells (Ding et al. 2023). However, the former is favorable owing to its superb efficacy, as well as the fact that it does not generate emissions or pollutants. Furthermore, the proton exchange membrane is primarily exploited in electrical energy production via chemical reactions (Wilson et al. 2013). The system composition of the fuel cell is constructed from; a polymeric electrolyte membrane, gas diffusion layer, and catalyst layer (Casalegno et al. 2007; Chang et al. 2008) in addition to the centered proton electrolyte membrane in the middle of the fuel cell that is responsible for the proton transfer, the flow of electrons and fuel, and the conservation of mechanical and chemical stability (Heinzel and Barragan 1999). Hence, for the importance of proton electrolyte membrane, many studies have boosted it to increase its oxidative stability, proton conductivity, and mechanical/thermal stability, as well as decline the process cost and fuel crossover (Peighambardoust et al. 2010; Shaari and Kamarudin 2019).
In one study, Lee et al. (2019) designed sulfonated polyarylene ether sulfone/sulfonated poly arylene thioether sulfone-grafted graphene oxide membranes (SPAES/SPA-ES/GO) as a filler for PEMFC. Interestingly, it was monitored for an enhancement in the tensile strength of the pure SPAES after adding SPA-ES/GO. This observation may be accredited to the possible interactions between sulfonic acid-containing SPAES and the belonging functional groups of graphene oxide, in addition to the π-π interactions between SPAES and graphene oxide. The acquired results of the proton conductivity test denoted an increase in the membranes’ conductivity with the increase in their relative humidity, which may be attributed to increasing the water content that could be a proton carrier and also a bridge between the abundant sulfonic functional groups (Yang et al. 2008). The optimal graphene oxide concentration in the SPAES/SPA-ES/GO membranes was 2 wt.% since the proton conductivity attained 131.43 mS/cm. The neat SPAES membrane revealed a higher proton conductivity value than the SPAES/SPA-ES/2 (wt.%) GO at a relative humidity lower than 80%; however, SPAES/SPA-ES/2 (wt.%) GO possesses higher water uptake owing to the presence of the hydrophilic graphene oxide. Also, Yang et al. (2022) exhibited an auspicious enhancement in the proton conductivity of the sulfonated polyimide membrane after introducing MIL-101(Fe)-NH2 reached 0.194 S/cm. This finding owes to the individual structure of MIL-101(Fe), the synergistic effect of the additional amino groups, and the acid–base interactions that increase the proton conduction.
In another study, Nayak et al. (2023) fabricated a membrane from sulfonated poly ether-ether-ketone, silicon dioxide, and polyvinylidene fluorideco-hexafluoro propylene for a microbial fuel cell. The microbial fuel cell’s performance relies on the metabolism and the growth of anaerobic bacteria that may be hindered when oxygen diffuses from the cathode, passing through the membrane to the anode. Notably, the elevation in the embedded silicon dioxide proportion from 2.5 to 10 weight percentage improved the oxygen permeation declined from 8.3 × 10–7 to 8.8 × 10–8 cm2/S. In addition, sulfonic acid groups act as oxygen barriers, which boost the oxygen permeability resistance of the membrane as well.
Biodiesel separation
Biodiesel is a clean, renewable, and biodegradable energy source, which is distinguished by its non-toxic emitted gases as it does not contain sulfur or organic substitutes (Demirbas 2009; Guldhe et al. 2015). In general, biodiesel production proceeds via the oil/alcohol transesterification process in the existence of a catalyst (Endalew et al. 2011). Nonetheless, the feedstock may contain fatty acids and water, giving rise to the form of soap that dramatically deactivates the used catalyst and directly renders the bio-diesel separation pretty hard (Chen et al. 2014; Yadav et al. 2017). It is well known that biodiesel economics is mainly determined based on its purity degree. Consequently, diverse technologies are utilized to separate the biodiesel, including membrane, gas strip**, extraction, pretraction, and adsorption (Hajilary et al. 2019). Membrane technology is deemed cost-effective and more efficient than the other strategies owing to its superb selectivity, relatively high efficacy, operational simplicity, ease of control, energy saving, high stability under varied conditions, eco-friendliness, and scale-up (Atadashi et al. 2011). Hence, several assessments were executed to foster the efficiency of membranes in the bio-diesel separation and study the impact of the various operational conditions on the quality of the separated biodiesel.
In one assessment, Bansod et al. (2022) engineered silicon dioxide/aluminum oxide ceramics membranes with varied pore sizes for separating glycerol from biodiesel. The glycerol retention reached 99.8% at a pressure of about 3 bar, 10 (wt.%) of ethanol, and using a ceramic membrane with a pore size of 0.2 mm. The ethanol concentration influenced the glycerol retention since the optimal glycerol retention was 99.8% using 10 wt.% of ethanol. At the same time, the raising in the ethanol concentration over 10 wt.% declined the retention of glycerol. This performance may be due to the ability of ethanol to act as a surfactant in which its polar part attaches to glycerol, and the nonpolar interacts with the biodiesel, decreasing the glycerol/biodiesel interfacial tension. Thus, the glycerol molecules are easily collapsed into smaller droplets and penetrate through the membrane, increasing the glycerol concentration in permeate flux and directly dwindling the glycerol retention (Pittia et al. 2005; Lin and Lin 2007). In this context, Gomes et al. (2010) deduced that the best glycerol retention was around 99.6% by a 0.2 μm pore size ceramics membrane at 2 bar and 5 wt.% of ethanol. Likewise, the over-raising in the ethanol concentration over 5 wt.% led to an increase in the glycerol in the permeate flux reached the maximum level (0.19 ± 0.013% mass) using 20 wt.% ethanol.
Furthermore, Saleh et al. (2010) fabricated a developed polyacrylonitrile membrane for separating glycerol from fatty acid methyl esters (FAME). The impact of the present materials on the transesterification process, such as water, methanol, and soap, on the glycerol separation was investigated. The experimental findings implied the purification of FAME from glycerol using the as-fabricated membrane, reaching the standards of EN 14214 and ASTM D6751. A small proportion of water (2 g water/1 L FAME) is required to form large glycerol particles in FAME and facilitate the glycerol separation. In addition, the presence of 1% methanol had a negative result on the glycerol separation from FAME, while 1% soap almost prevented the glycerol separation.
Purification of biogas
Biogas production essentially proceeds via the anaerobic digestion of organic wastes, wastewater remediation plants, and gas recovery from landfills (Ryckebosch et al. 2011; Baena-Moreno et al. 2019a). Generally, biogas mainly consists of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and methane gases. In addition to the possible existence of ammonia, water vapor, hydrogen sulfide, or oxygen, according to the feed source and locations, climate conditions, and the adopted technology (Awe et al. 2017). The hydrogen sulfide traces in biogas cause many problems, especially in the existence of water vapor where they react and generate sulfuric acid and hydrogen that decline the calorific value of biogas and corrode the machine’s pipes (Baena-Moreno et al. 2019b). Moreover, carbon dioxide is the biggest problem in producing purified biogas since it diminishes the calorific value and over-raises the compression and transportation costs (Rosha et al. 2021). It is critical to remove these impurities to produce purified biogas, which has high-quality methane gas that can be employed in wide applications: heat production, vehicle fuel, fuel cells, and electricity (Farghali et al. 2022). For purifying biogas from carbon dioxide, varied technologies have been applied, comprising water scrubbing, cryogenic separation, chemical absorption, biological method, and pressure swing adsorption (Liu et al. 2022). In addition, membrane separation is more desirable than the former technologies owing to its high energy efficiency, high selectivity (about 97%), excellent efficacy in methane recovery, and operation simplicity (Basu et al. 2010; Franco et al. 2021). Nonetheless, membrane separation has drawbacks, such as selectivity/permeability tradeoffs, high cost of membrane production, and membrane. Thereby, continued research investigations have been done day-by-day to boost the efficiency and lifetime of membranes and diminish their production capital cost.
In this context, Yang et al. (2019a) fabricated a Pebax-embedded amino organosilicon nanotube membrane for methane purification from carbon dioxide. The results showed the positive role of the amino group in the carbon dioxide/methane selectivity from 25 to 29 because of its ability to transport carbon dioxide. Furthermore, the membrane’s porosity and the introduced amino group vastly enhanced the permeability of carbon dioxide from 9000 to 9500 Barrers throughout the membrane. In addition, the absorption stability of polytetrafluoroethylene membrane was examined in the separation of carbon dioxide throughout 36 h. It was observed that the removal of carbon dioxide exceeded 99%, and the flux was still about 0.72 × 10–3 mol/m2.s (Li et al. 2021). Such promising stability may be due to the hydrophobic character of the membrane. Notably, Nishikawa et al. (1995) inferred the polytetrafluoroethylene stability during the carbon dioxide absorption for 6600 h.
Furthermore, Zito et al. (2022) designed a polyetherimide/polyimide membrane for methane purification. The carbon dioxide/methane selectivity was 17.4 in mixed gas conditions, while the selectivity diminished to 16.6 in a wet condition due to the water vapor existence. Interestingly, exposing the polyetherimide/polyimide membrane to water vapor and hydrogen sulfide declined the carbon dioxide permeability by only 14% after 646 days.
In terms of biogas slurry, reverse osmosis membranes have also been applied in the concentration of biogas slurry. In one instance, an integrated sand filter/microfiltration/ultrafiltration/reverse osmosis process was used to concentrate biogas slurry for fertilizer and water recovery. The pilot test demonstrated that reverse osmosis membranes achieved high chemical oxygen demand and ammonia nitrogen removal rates, and fouling issues were addressed using optimized chemical agents (Ruan et al. 2015). Furthermore, reverse osmosis membranes offer versatile solutions for simultaneous gas removal. Dolejš et al. (2014) explored the use of thin film composite-polyamide membranes to simultaneously remove carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide from agro-biogas. The thin film composite membrane, in its water-swollen state, exhibited the ability to remove carbon dioxide and sulfur oxide up to 82% and 77%, respectively, at 220 kPa. The advantage of this process is that it eliminates the need for pre-treatment to remove water vapor, which can negatively impact the performance of other membranes.
In summary, membrane separation technology revealed propitious performance in providing alternative clean energy like fuel cells, biogas, and biodiesel. Its efficacy and eco-friendly advantages characterize membrane technology. However, the durability and cost of membranes still require further investigation.
Other applications
Reverse osmosis has been employed in various applications, where previously reported reverse osmosis applications in concentrating juice. The interest in reverse osmosis concentration of fruit juices began 40 years ago, owing to its benefits over conventional thermal-based processes: (i) minimal thermal component damage, (ii) low energy consumption, and (iii) capacity to create high-quality goods (retain product taste) (Wenten and Khoiruddin 2016). Table 8 shows the performance of the reverse osmosis membrane during the concentration of various juices.
In this context, Bagci et al. (2019) discovered that the concentration of pomegranate juice can be increased fourfold, from 15.6 to 65 °Brix, by combining reverse osmosis and osmotic distillation processes with enhanced performance. The researchers utilized a low-pressure nitrogen plasma (LPNM)-modified commercial thin-film composite membrane in the reverse osmosis process as a pre-concentration step before further concentration with osmotic distillation. The LPNM-modified reverse osmosis membrane's performance was compared to that of a standard commercial reverse osmosis membrane. Although there was no significant difference in the operating time required to achieve a concentration of 65 °Brix when using the commercial reverse osmosis membrane with osmotic distillation process compared to standalone osmotic distillation concentration, the LPNM-modified commercial reverse osmosis membrane exhibited excellent performance when combined with osmotic distillation. It reduced the duration of the concentration process by 36% while preserving the aroma of the juice, which is typically lost when osmotic distillation is used alone. The chemical content of the juice remained well-preserved. However, due to increased membrane permeability resulting from LPNM modification, the retention of malic acid, gallic acid, glucose, and fructose was lower compared to osmotic distillation and commercial reverse osmosis-osmotic distillation concentration processes.
In another study, Kumar et al. (2020) investigated the potential of hybrid membrane processes involving reverse osmosis and osmotic distillation for concentrating mandarin juice. They preconcentrated clarified Nagpur mandarin juice using a polyamide spiral-wound reverse osmosis membrane at a low temperature of 10.4 °C. As shown in Table 8, the reverse osmosis retentate was then further concentrated using a polypropylene hollow fiber osmotic distillation process at 25.4 °C, with a calcium chloride dihydrate (CaCl2 · 2H2O) solution (at a weight ratio of 2 draw solutions to 1 feed solution). After 16 h of operation, the final concentration of clarified Nagpur mandarin reached 60.4 °Brix, corresponding to a 6.7-fold concentration factor.
Similarly, in drying milk, reverse osmosis is employed for concentrating milk by taking advantage of low working temperatures. The pre-concentration of milk can help in diminishing transportation costs (Deshwal et al. 2021). Mainly, reverse osmosis is applied in the dairy field to recover milk lactose and proteins, along with generating a permeate that can be reused for cooling or rinsing, Spiral wound modules have been utilized extensively due to their high availability and efficient cost (Wang and Wang 2019). Moreover, the concentration of milk leads to manufacturing ice cream by reverse osmosis as water content that can be eliminated reaches 70% while solids can be maintained (Wenten and Khoiruddin 2016).
Nanofiltration membranes are utilized in the dairy industry to allow the passage of unwanted monovalent ions like sodium, potassium, and chlorine for the demineralization of whey products and concurrently working on raising the concentration of constituents such as calcium, protein, and lactose (Rice et al. 2005). Also, nanofiltration can be employed in the separation of various neutral species, such as simple monosaccharides glucose (180 MW) and xylose (150 MW) (Sjöman et al. 2007).
In the pharmaceutical industry, nanofiltration enables the separation and purification of pharmaceutical compounds, concentration of active ingredients, and removal of impurities from synthesis reactions. It offers a reliable solution for meeting stringent quality standards and regulatory requirements (Mallakpour and Azadi 2021; Yadav et al. 2022). Furthermore, in metal plating and electronic industries, nanofiltration plays a crucial role in the recovery of metal salts and purification of process streams (Wei et al. 2013; Basaran et al. 2016). Other industries, such as agriculture (Zacharof et al. 2016) and natural essential oils (Donelian et al. 2016), benefit from nanofiltration. It aids in the removal of contaminants, fractionation of compounds, and concentration of valuable components. Nanofiltration contributes to resource efficiency, waste minimization, and the production of high-quality products. Table 9 summarizes key industrial processes in which nanofiltration is utilized as a primary or in conjunction with other separation techniques (Nath et al. 2018; Du et al. 2022).
Pervaporation is a new technique for gasoline desulfurization that gained much interest owing to the auspicious ability to remove eco-friendly sulfur in the petrochemical industry due to the significant pervaporation characteristics such as feasibility, economical, and highly selective membranes. Fluid catalytic cracking gasoline encompasses 85–95% of sulfur elements besides 30–40% of the overall gasoline (Wang et al. 2020a). Thus, desulfurization from fluid catalytic cracking is a vital step to attain extreme desulfurization of gasoline.
Hou et al. (2019) enhanced pervaporation membrane performance by incorporating silica nanoparticles into polyvinyl butyral, and for tackling membrane defects, a coupling agent was added to improve the compatibility among polyvinyl butyral and silica. When operating under higher temperatures, the gasoline rate diffusion across the membranes is elevated, therefore accompanied by elevating permeation flux. Considering the ideal operating temperature is 80 °C, the flux attains 1.44 kg/m2.h with 2 wt.% silica to polyvinyl butyral mass ratio. While in the medical field, pervaporation was conducted by Slater et al. (2012) to act as a green drying method for recovering tetrahydrofuran in drug preparations. Moreover, this study has been utilized in the preparation of a novel tumor drug step.
Conclusion
The global challenges of sustainable development, environmental preservation, and climate change mitigation necessitate innovative solutions. Membrane technology, combined with the power of machine learning, emerges as a cornerstone for a cleaner and more sustainable future. In the realm of water treatment, membrane filtration processes such as reverse osmosis and nanofiltration provide sustainable solutions by efficiently removing contaminants from water sources. With a staggering 2 billion people lacking safe water access globally and a significant amount of untreated wastewater being released into the environment, the importance of membrane technology in providing clean water cannot be overstated. By minimizing the need for chemical treatments and offering effective filtration, membranes play a vital role in addressing water scarcity and contamination issues.
Furthermore, membrane technology contributes to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through selective gas separation. Carbon dioxide emissions have reached record levels in recent years, and membrane-based carbon capture and purification of industrial gases offer energy-efficient alternatives. By selectively separating different gases based on their molecular properties, membrane gas separation provides a cost-effective and environmentally sustainable solution for industries such as natural gas processing and hydrogen production. In the realm of energy production, membrane technology enhances efficiency and sustainability. Membrane-based fuel cells enable the efficient conversion of chemical energy into electricity, while membrane systems such as membrane reactors find applications in hydrogen production and carbon dioxide capture. By facilitating the transport of ions and preventing reactant mixing, membranes contribute to the advancement of clean and renewable energy sources. The integration of machine learning in membrane design and discovery revolutionizes the field by enabling accurate prediction of membrane properties and optimization of system performance. This integration leads to the development of specialized membranes tailored for specific applications, further enhancing the overall efficiency and effectiveness of membrane technology.
In summary, membrane technology, driven by machine learning, offers sustainable solutions for water treatment, gas separation, and energy production. With the potential to address water scarcity, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and enhance energy production efficiency, membranes and machine learning represent a promising combination for a cleaner and more sustainable future. Continued research and development in this field will further unlock the full potential of membrane technology and contribute to the global pursuit of sustainable development and environmental preservation.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this review do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission or the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB).
References
Abdel-Fatah MA (2018) Nanofiltration systems and applications in wastewater treatment: review article. Ain Shams Eng J 9(4):3077–3092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2018.08.001
Abejón A, Garea A, Irabien A (2015) Arsenic removal from drinking water by reverse osmosis: minimization of costs and energy consumption. Sep Purif Technol 144:46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2015.02.017
Abetz V, Brinkmann T, Dijkstra M, Ebert K, Fritsch D, Ohlrogge K, Paul D, Peinemann KV, Pereira-Nunes S, Scharnagl N (2006) Developments in membrane research: from material via process design to industrial application. Adv Eng Mater 8(5):328–358
Ahmad NNR, Ang WL, Leo CP, Mohammad AW, Hilal N (2021) Current advances in membrane technologies for saline wastewater treatment: a comprehensive review. Desalination 517:115170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2021.115170
Ahmad NNR, Ang WL, Teow YH, Mohammad AW, Hilal N (2022) Nanofiltration membrane processes for water recycling, reuse and product recovery within various industries: a review. J Water Process Eng 45:102478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102478
Ahmed I, Pa NFC, Nawawi MGM, Rahman WAWA (2011) Modified polydimethylsiloxane/polystyrene blended IPN pervaporation membrane for ethanol/water separation. J Appl Polym Sci 122(4):2666–2679. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.34319
Ahsan A, Imteaz M (2019) Nanofiltration membrane technology providing quality drinking water. In: Nanotechnology in water and wastewater treatment. 291–295. (Elsevier)
Ainscough TJ, Oatley-Radcliffe DL, Barron AR (2021) Groundwater remediation of volatile organic compounds using nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes-a field study. Membranes 11(1):61. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11010061
Al-Amoudi A, Lovitt RW (2007) Fouling strategies and the cleaning system of NF membranes and factors affecting cleaning efficiency. J Membr Sci 303(1–2):6–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2007.06.002
Al-Karaghouli A, Renne D, Kazmerski LL (2010) Technical and economic assessment of photovoltaic-driven desalination systems. Renew Energy 35(2):323–328
Al-Zoubi H, Hilal N, Darwish NA, Mohammad AW (2007) Rejection and modelling of sulphate and potassium salts by nanofiltration membranes: neural network and Spiegler-Kedem model. Desalination 206(1–3):42–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.02.060
Al-Zoubi H, Rieger A, Steinberger P, Pelz W, Haseneder R, Härtel G (2010) Optimization study for treatment of acid mine drainage using membrane technology. Sep Sci Technol 45(14):2004–2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2010.480963
Albatrni H, Qiblawey H, El-Naas MH (2021) Comparative study between adsorption and membrane technologies for the removal of mercury. Sep Purif Technol 257:117833
Alivisatos P, Buchanan M (2010) Basic research needs for carbon capture: beyond 2020. USDOE Office of Science (SC) (United States)
Alizamir M, Keshavarz A, Abdollahi F, Khosravi A, Karagöz S (2023) Accurately predicting the performance of MOF-based mixed matrix membranes for CO2 removal using a novel optimized extreme learning machine by BAT algorithm. Sep Purif Technol 325:124689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.124689
Alonso-Riaño P, Illera AE, Amândio MST, Xavier AMRB, Beltrán S, Sanz MT (2023) Valorization of brewer’s spent grain by furfural recovery/removal from subcritical water hydrolysates by pervaporation. Sep Purif Technol 309:123008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.123008
Alsarayreh AA, Al-Obaidi MA, Patel R, Mujtaba IM (2020) Scope and limitations of modelling, simulation, and optimisation of a spiral wound reverse osmosis process-based water desalination. Processes 8(5):573
Alvarez V, Alvarez S, Riera FA, Alvarez R (1997) Permeate flux prediction in apple juice concentration by reverse osmosis. J Membr Sci 127(1):25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00285-2
Alzahrani S, Mohammad AW (2014) Challenges and trends in membrane technology implementation for produced water treatment: a review. J Water Process Eng 4:107–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2014.09.007
Amirilargani M, Yokota GN, Vermeij GH, Merlet RB, Delen G, Mandemaker LD, Weckhuysen BM, Winnubst L, Nijmeijer A, de Smet LC (2020) Melamine-based microporous organic framework thin films on an alumina membrane for high-flux organic solvent nanofiltration. Chemsuschem 13(1):136–140
An Q, Chen JT, De Guzman M, Hung WS, Lee KR, Lai JY (2011) Multilayered poly(vinylidene fluoride) composite membranes with improved interfacial compatibility: correlating pervaporation performance with free volume properties. Langmuir 27(17):11062–11070. https://doi.org/10.1021/la2018314
Anis SF, Hashaikeh R, Hilal N (2019) Reverse osmosis pretreatment technologies and future trends: A comprehensive review. Desalination 452:159–195
Anisah S, Kanezashi M, Nagasawa H, Tsuru T (2020) Al2O3 nanofiltration membranes fabricated from nanofiber sols: Preparation, characterization, and performance. J Membr Sci 611:118401
Anticó E, Vera R, Vázquez F, Fontàs C, Lu C, Ros J (2021) Preparation and characterization of nanoparticle-doped polymer inclusion membranes. Application to the removal of arsenate and phosphate from waters. Materials 14(4):878
Antony A, Fudianto R, Cox S, Leslie G (2010) Assessing the oxidative degradation of polyamide reverse osmosis membrane—Accelerated ageing with hypochlorite exposure. J Membr Sci 347(1–2):159–164
Antony A, Low JH, Gray S, Childress AE, Le-Clech P, Leslie G (2011) Scale formation and control in high pressure membrane water treatment systems: a review. J Membr Sci 383(1–2):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2011.08.054
Aroon M, Ismail A, Montazer-Rahmati M, Matsuura T (2010) Effect of chitosan as a functionalization agent on the performance and separation properties of polyimide/multi-walled carbon nanotubes mixed matrix flat sheet membranes. J Membr Sci 364(1–2):309–317
Asad A, Sameoto D, Sadrzadeh M (2020) Overview of membrane technology. In: Nanocomposite Membranes for Water and Gas Separation. pp. 1–28. (Elsevier)
Atadashi I, Aroua M, Aziz AA (2011) Biodiesel separation and purification: a review. Renew Energy 36(2):437–443
Awe OW, Zhao Y, Nzihou A, Minh DP, Lyczko N (2017) A review of biogas utilisation, purification and upgrading technologies. Waste Biomass Valorization 8:267–283
Babaie O, Esfahany MN (2020) Optimization of a new combined approach to reduce energy consumption in the hybrid reactive distillation-pervaporation process. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 151(1079):10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2020.107910
Baena-Moreno FM, Rodríguez-Galán M, Vega F, Alonso-Fariñas B, Vilches Arenas LF, Navarrete B (2019a) Carbon capture and utilization technologies: a literature review and recent advances. Energy Sour, Part a: Recovery, Utilization, Environ Effects 41(12):1403–1433
Baena-Moreno FM, Rodríguez-Galán M, Vega F, Vilches LF, Navarrete B (2019b) Recent advances in biogas purifying technologies. Int J Green Energy 16(5):401–412
Bagci PO, Akbas M, Gulec HA, Bagci U (2019) Coupling reverse osmosis and osmotic distillation for clarified pomegranate juice concentration: use of plasma modified reverse osmosis membranes for improved performance. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 52:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2018.12.013
Bagheri M, Akbari A, Mirbagheri SA (2019) Advanced control of membrane fouling in filtration systems using artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques: a critical review. Process Saf Environ Prot 123:229–252
Baheri B, Shahverdi M, Rezakazemi M, Motaee E, Mohammadi T (2015) Performance of PVA/NaA mixed matrix membrane for removal of water from ethylene glycol solutions by pervaporation. Chem Eng Commun 202(3):316–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986445.2013.841149
Baker RW (2002) Future directions of membrane gas separation technology. Ind Eng Chem Res 41(6):1393–1411
Baker RW (2012) Membrane technology and applications. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken
Balasooriya BMJK, Rajapakse J, Gallage C (2023) A review of drinking water quality issues in remote and indigenous communities in rich nations with special emphasis on Australia. Sci Total Environ 903:166559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166559
Banerjee S, Gupta S, Dalal A, Hazra T, Shah MP, Ghosh S (2023) Integration of membrane technology in microalgal photobioreactor for biodiesel production along with industrial wastewater remediation: a green approach. In: Biorefinery for Water and Wastewater Treatment. 299–312.
Bansod P, Kodape S, Bhasarkar J, Bhutada D (2022) Ceramic membranes (Al2O3/TiO2) used for separation glycerol from biodiesel using response surface methodology. Mater Today: Proc 57:1101–1107
Barbiero P, Squillero G, Tonda AJapa (2020) Modeling generalization in machine learning: a methodological and computational study. https://doi.org/10.48550/ar**v.2006.15680
Barnett JW, Bilchak CR, Wang Y, Benicewicz BC, Murdock LA, Bereau T, Kumar SK (2020) Designing exceptional gas-separation polymer membranes using machine learning. Sci Adv 6(20):eaaz4301. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz4301
Basaran G, Kavak D, Dizge N, Asci Y, Solener M, Ozbey B (2016) Comparative study of the removal of nickel(II) and chromium(VI) heavy metals from metal plating wastewater by two nanofiltration membranes. Desalin Water Treat 57(46):21870–21880. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1127778
Basu S, Khan AL, Cano-Odena A, Liu C, Vankelecom IF (2010) Membrane-based technologies for biogas separations. Chem Soc Rev 39(2):750–768
Bates IIC, Carrillo IBS, Germain H, Loranger É, Chabot B (2021) Antibacterial electrospun chitosan-PEO/TEMPO-oxidized cellulose composite for water filtration. J Environ Chem Eng 9(5):106204
Bello RH, Linzmeyer P, Franco CM, Souza O, Sellin N, Medeiros SH, Marangoni C (2014) Pervaporation of ethanol produced from banana waste. Waste Manag 34(8):1501–1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.04.013
Bera SP, Godhaniya M, Kothari C (2022) Emerging and advanced membrane technology for wastewater treatment: A review. J Basic Microbiol 62(3–4):245–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.202100259
Bolto B, Hoang M, **e ZL (2011) A review of membrane selection for the dehydration of aqueous ethanol by pervaporation. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 50(3):227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2011.01.003
Boroglu MS, Gurkaynak MA (2011) The preparation of novel silica modified polyimide membranes: Synthesis, characterization, and gas separation properties. Polym Adv Technol 22(5):545–553
Boyd PG, Chidambaram A, García-Díez E, Ireland CP, Daff TD, Bounds R, Gładysiak A, Schouwink P, Moosavi SM, Maroto-Valer MM (2019) Data-driven design of metal–organic frameworks for wet flue gas CO2 capture. Nature 576(7786):253–256
Brüschke H (2006) State‐of‐the‐Art of Pervaporation Processes in the Chemical Industry. Membrane Technology: in the Chemical Industry, 151–202.
Buonomenna M (2016) Smart composite membranes for advanced wastewater treatments. In: Smart composite coatings and membranes. pp. 371–419. (Elsevier)
Burns, Corporation RIS, Research USOoW) (1979) Reverse Osmosis Technical Manual. (The Office)
Cadotte J, Forester R, Kim M, Petersen R, Stocker T (1988) Nanofiltration membranes broaden the use of membrane separation technology. Desalination 70(1–3):77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-9164(88)85045-8
Cadotte JE (1981) Interfacially synthesized reverse osmosis membrane. Google Patents,
Cannilla C, Bonura G, Frusteri F (2017) Potential of pervaporation and vapor separation with water selective membranes for an optimized production of biofuels—a review. Catalysts 7(6):187
Carta M, Malpass-Evans R, Croad M, Rogan Y, Jansen JC, Bernardo P, Bazzarelli F, McKeown NB (2013) An efficient polymer molecular sieve for membrane gas separations. Science 339(6117):303–307
Casalegno A, Grassini P, Marchesi R (2007) Experimental analysis of methanol cross-over in a direct methanol fuel cell. Appl Therm Eng 27(4):748–754
Cassano A, Drioli E, Galaverna G, Marchelli R, Di Silvestro G, Cagnasso P (2003) Clarification and concentration of citrus and carrot juices by integrated membrane processes. J Food Eng 57(2):153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(02)00293-5
Castro-Muñoz R (2020) Breakthroughs on tailoring pervaporation membranes for water desalination: a review. Water Res 187:116428
Castro-Muñoz R, Ahmad MZ, Cassano A (2021) Pervaporation-aided processes for the selective separation of aromas, fragrances and essential (AFE) solutes from agro-food products and wastes. Food Rev Intl 39(3):1499–1525. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.2021.1934008
Castro-Munoz R, Galiano F, Figoli A (2020) Recent advances in pervaporation hollow fiber membranes for dehydration of organics. Chem Eng Res Des 164:68–85
Chang J-Y, Kuan Y-D, Lee S-M, Lee S-R (2008) Characterization of a liquid feed direct methanol fuel cell with Sierpinski carpets fractal current collectors. J Power Sour 184(1):180–190
Chen C, Zuo Y, Ye W, Li X, Deng Z, Ong SP (2020) A critical review of machine learning of energy materials. Adv Energy Mater 10(8):1903242
Chen S-Y, Lao-Ubol S, Mochizuki T, Abe Y, Toba M, Yoshimura Y (2014) Production of Jatropha biodiesel fuel over sulfonic acid-based solid acids. Biores Technol 157:346–350
Chen Y, Wang B, Zhao L, Dutta P, Ho WW (2015) New Pebax®/zeolite Y composite membranes for CO2 capture from flue gas. J Membr Sci 495:415–423
Choi JH, Jegal J, Kim WN, Choi HS (2009) Incorporation of multiwalled carbon nanotubes into poly (vinyl alcohol) membranes for use in the pervaporation of water/ethanol mixtures. J Appl Polym Sci 111(5):2186–2193
Choi S-H, Brunetti A, Drioli E, Barbieri G (2010) H2 separation from H2/N2 and H2/CO mixtures with co-polyimide hollow fiber module. Sep Sci Technol 46(1):1–13
Choi Y, Jang Y, Lee S (2017) Prediction of silica fouling using mathematical model and artificial neural network in a direct contact membrane distillation. Desalin Water Treat 90:16–22. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2017.20940
Chu ZY, Chen KK, **ao CF, Ji DW, Ling HY, Li MY, Liu HL (2020) Improving pressure durability and fractionation property via reinforced PES loose nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes for textile wastewater treatment. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 108:71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2019.12.009
Chung S, Kim S, Kim J-O, Chung J (2014) Feasibility of combining reverse osmosis–ferrite process for reclamation of metal plating wastewater and recovery of heavy metals. Ind Eng Chem Res 53(39):15192–15199
Corbatón-Báguena MJ, Vincent-Vela MC, Gozálvez-Zafrilla JM, Alvarez-Blanco S, Lora-García J, Catalán-Martínez D (2016) Comparison between artificial neural networks and Hermia’s models to assess ultrafiltration performance. Sep Purif Technol 170:434–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2016.07.007
Cordier C, Stavrakakis C, Morga B, Degremont L, Voulgaris A, Bacchi A, Sauvade P, Coelho F, Moulin P (2020) Removal of pathogens by ultrafiltration from sea water. Environ Int 142:105809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105809
Coutinho de Paula E, Amaral MCS (2017) Extending the life-cycle of reverse osmosis membranes: A review. Waste Manag Res 35(5):456–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242x16684383
Daglar H, Erucar I, Keskin S (2021) Exploring the performance limits of MOF/polymer MMMs for O2/N2 separation using computational screening. J Membr Sci 618:118555
Darwish N, Hilal N, Al-Zoubi H, Mohammad A (2007) Neural networks simulation of the filtration of sodium chloride and magnesium chloride solutions using nanofiltration membranes. Chem Eng Res Des 85(4):417–430
De Guzman M, Liu P-Y, Chen J-T, Tung K-L, Lee K-R, Lai J-Y (2011) Effect of compatibilizer on compatibility and pervaporation performance of PC/PHEMA blend membranes. J Membr Sci 378(1–2):503–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2011.05.035
Demirbas A (2009) Biodiesel from waste cooking oil via base-catalytic and supercritical methanol transesterification. Energy Convers Manage 50(4):923–927
Deshwal GK, Akshit, Kadyan S, Sharma H, Singh AK, Panjagari NR, Meena GS (2021) Applications of reverse osmosis in dairy processing: an Indian perspective. J Food Sci Technol, 1–13.
Dey P, Singh P, Saha M (2023) An insight into the recent developments in membrane-based carbon dioxide capture and utilization. In: Green Sustainable Process for Chemical and Environmental Engineering and Science. p 311–326.
Ding HB, Dong YY, Zhang Y, Yang Y, Wen C (2023) Energy efficiency assessment of hydrogen recirculation ejectors for proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) system. Appl Energy 346:121357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121357
Do Thi HT, Mizsey P, Toth AJ (2020) Separation of alcohol-water mixtures by a combination of distillation. Hydrophilic Organophilic Pervaporation Processes Membr (basel) 10(11):345. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes10110345
Do Thi HT, Pasztor T, Fozer D, Manenti F, Toth AJ (2021) Comparison of desalination technologies using renewable energy sources with life cycle, PESTLE, and multi-criteria decision analyses. Water 13(21):3023. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13213023
Dolejš P, Poštulka V, Sedláková Z, Jandová V, Vejražka J, Esposito E, Jansen JC, Izák P (2014) Simultaneous hydrogen sulphide and carbon dioxide removal from biogas by water–swollen reverse osmosis membrane. Sep Purif Technol 131:108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2014.04.041
Donelian A, de Oliveira PF, Rodrigues AE, Mata VG, Machado RAF (2016) Performance of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes in the fractionation and retention of patchouli essential oil. J Supercrit Fluids 107:639–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.supflu.2015.07.026
Dong G, Li H, Chen V (2013) Challenges and opportunities for mixed-matrix membranes for gas separation. J Mater Chem A 1(15):4610–4630
Dong GY, Nagasawa H, Yu L, Wang Q, Yamamoto K, Ohshita J, Kanezashi M, Tsuru T (2020) Pervaporation removal of methanol from methanol/organic azeotropes using organosilica membranes: experimental and modeling. J Membr Sci 610:118284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118284
Dou J, Han S, Lin SS, Qi ZF, Huang FP, Feng XD, Yao ZK, Wang J, Zhang L (2023) Tailoring the selectivity of quasi-PIMs nanofiltration membrane molecular flexibility of acyl chloride monomers for desalination from dye effluents. J Membr Sci 671:121382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2023.121382
Du Y, Pramanik BK, Zhang Y, Dumee L, Jegatheesan V (2022) Recent advances in the theory and application of nanofiltration: a review. Curr Pollut Rep 8(1):51–80
Duan C, Meng X, Liu C, Lu W, Liu J, Dai L, Wang W, Zhao W, **ong C, Ni Y (2019a) Carbohydrates-rich corncobs supported metal-organic frameworks as versatile biosorbents for dye removal and microbial inactivation. Carbohyd Polym 222:115042
Duan K, Wang J, Zhang Y, Liu J (2019b) Covalent organic frameworks (COFs) functionalized mixed matrix membrane for effective CO2/N2 separation. J Membr Sci 572:588–595
Duarte A, Bordado J (2016) Smart composite reverse-osmosis membranes for energy generation and water desalination processes. In: Smart Composite Coatings and Membranes. p 329–350. (Elsevier)
Echavarría AP, Falguera V, Torras C, Berdún C, Pagán J, Ibarz A (2012) Ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis for clarification and concentration of fruit juices at pilot plant scale. LWT Food Sci Technol 46(1):189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2011.10.008
Eke J, Yusuf A, Giwa A, Sodiq A (2020) The global status of desalination: an assessment of current desalination technologies, plants and capacity. Desalination 495:114633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2020.114633
Eljaddi T, Mendez DLM, Favre E, Roizard D (2021) Development of new pervaporation composite membranes for desalination: Theoretical and experimental investigations. Desalination 507:115006
Elma M, Rahma A, Mustalifah FR, Wahid AR, Lamandau DR, Fatimah S, Huda MS, Alsiren MA, Nasruddin, Saraswati NKDA, Simatupang PFA, Firdaus M, Abdurrahman (2023) Nanofiltration technology applied for peat and wetland saline water. In: Nanofiltration membrane for water purification. p. 217–245. (Springer)
Emonds S, Roth H, Wessling M (2020) Chemistry in a spinneret–formation of hollow fiber membranes with a cross-linked polyelectrolyte separation layer. J Membr Sci 612:118325
Endalew AK, Kiros Y, Zanzi R (2011) Heterogeneous catalysis for biodiesel production from Jatropha curcas oil (JCO). Energy 36(5):2693–2700
Farghali M et al (2022) Integration of biogas systems into a carbon zero and hydrogen economy: a review. Environ Chem Lett 20:2853–2927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-022-01468-z
Fatima F, Du HB, Kommalapati RR (2021) Treatment of poultry slaughterhouse wastewater with membrane technologies: a review. Water 13(14):1905. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141905
Feng S, Ren J, Hua K, Li H, Ren X, Deng M (2013) Poly (amide-12-b-ethylene oxide)/polyethylene glycol blend membranes for carbon dioxide separation. Sep Purif Technol 116:25–34
Feng XQ, Peng DL, Zhu JY, Wang Y, Zhang YT (2022) Recent advances of loose nanofiltration membranes for dye/salt separation. Sep Purif Technol 285:120228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.120228
Feria-Díaz JJ, Correa-Mahecha F, López-Méndez MC, Rodríguez-Miranda JP, Barrera-Rojas J (2021) Recent desalination technologies by hybridization and integration with reverse osmosis: a review. Water 13(10):1369
Fetanat M, Keshtiara M, Keyikoglu R, Khataee A, Daiyan R, Razmjou A (2021a) Machine learning for design of thin-film nanocomposite membranes. Sep Purif Technol 270:118383
Fetanat M, Keshtiara M, Low Z-X, Keyikoglu R, Khataee A, Orooji Y, Chen V, Leslie G, Razmjou A (2021b) Machine learning for advanced design of nanocomposite ultrafiltration membranes. Ind Eng Chem Res 60(14):5236–5250
Fetimi A, Dâas A, Benguerba Y, Merouani S, Hamachi M, Kebiche-Senhadji O, Hamdaoui O (2021) Optimization and prediction of safranin-O cationic dye removal from aqueous solution by emulsion liquid membrane (ELM) using artificial neural network-particle swarm optimization (ANN-PSO) hybrid model and response surface methodology (RSM). J Environ Chem Eng 9(5):105837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.105837
Figoli A, Santoro S, Galiano F, Basile A (2015) Pervaporation membranes: preparation, characterization, and application. In: Pervaporation, vapour permeation and membrane distillation. p 19–63. (Elsevier)
Franco AC, Franco LS, Tesser DP, Salvador R, de Francisco AC, Picinin CT, Piekarski CM (2021) Advances and challenges on the technologies and applications of biomethane. Energy Sour, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, Environ Eff 1–11.
Gao H, Zhong S, Zhang W, Igou T, Berger E, Reid E, Zhao Y, Lambeth D, Gan L, Afolabi MA, Tong Z, Lan G, Chen Y (2022) Revolutionizing membrane design using machine learning-bayesian optimization. Environ Sci Technol 56(4):2572–2581. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04373
Garg S, Behera S, Ruiz HA, Kumar S (2023) A review on opportunities and limitations of membrane bioreactor configuration in biofuel production. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 195(9):5497–5540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-022-03955-z
Gasós A, Becattini V, Brunetti A, Barbieri G, Mazzotti M (2023) Process performance maps for membrane-based CO2 separation using artificial neural networks. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 122:103812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103812
Gerardo ML, Oatley-Radcliffe DL, Lovitt RW (2014) Integration of membrane technology in microalgae biorefineries. J Membr Sci 464:86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2014.04.010
Ghandashtani MB, Ashtiani FZ, Karimi M, Fouladitajar A (2015) A novel approach to fabricate high performance nano-SiO2 embedded PES membranes for microfiltration of oil-in-water emulsion. Appl Surf Sci 349:393–402
Goh PS, Wong KC, Ismail AF (2022) Membrane technology: a versatile tool for saline wastewater treatment and resource recovery. Desalination 521:115377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2021.115377
Gomes MCS, Pereira NC, de Barros STD (2010) Separation of biodiesel and glycerol using ceramic membranes. J Membr Sci 352(1–2):271–276
Goswami KP, Pugazhenthi G (2020) Credibility of polymeric and ceramic membrane filtration in the removal of bacteria and virus from water: a review. J Environ Manage 268:110583
Greenlee LF, Lawler DF, Freeman BD, Marrot B, Moulin P (2009) Reverse osmosis desalination: water sources, technology, and today’s challenges. Water Res 43(9):2317–2348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2009.03.010
Guan J, Huang T, Liu W, Feng F, Japip S, Li JL, Wang XA, Zhang S (2022) Design and prediction of metal organic framework-based mixed matrix membranes for CO2 capture via machine learning. Cell Rep Phys Sci 3(5):100864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2022.100864
Guldhe A, Singh B, Mutanda T, Permaul K, Bux F (2015) Advances in synthesis of biodiesel via enzyme catalysis: novel and sustainable approaches. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1447–1464
Guo H, Li X, Yang W, Yao Z, Mei Y, Peng LE, Yang Z, Shao S, Tang CY (2022) Nanofiltration for drinking water treatment: a review. Front Chem Sci Eng 1–18.
Guo R, Ma X, Hu C, Jiang Z (2007) Novel PVA–silica nanocomposite membrane for pervaporative dehydration of ethylene glycol aqueous solution. Polymer 48(10):2939–2945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2007.03.035
Guo RL, Fang X, Wu H, Jiang ZY (2008) Preparation and pervaporation performance of surface crosslinked PVA/PES composite membrane. J Membr Sci 322(1):32–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2008.05.015
Guo S, Wan Y, Chen X, Luo J (2021) Loose nanofiltration membrane custom-tailored for resource recovery. Chem Eng J 409:127376
Gurak PD, Cabral LMC, Rocha-Leao MHM, Matta VM, Freitas SP (2010) Quality evaluation of grape juice concentrated by reverse osmosis. J Food Eng 96(3):421–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.08.024
Hailemariam RH, Woo YC, Damtie MM, Kim BC, Park K-D, Choi J-S (2020) Reverse osmosis membrane fabrication and modification technologies and future trends: a review. Adv Coll Interface Sci 276:102100
Hajian M, Jangchi Kashani S (2021) Evolution of the concept of sustainability. From Brundtland Report to sustainable development goals. In: Sustainable Resource Management. p 1–24.
Hajilary N, Rezakazemi M, Shirazian S (2019) Biofuel types and membrane separation. Environ Chem Lett 17:1–18
Halakoo E, Feng XS (2020) Self-assembled membranes from polyethylenimine and graphene oxide for pervaporation dehydration of ethylene glycol. J Membr Sci 616:118583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118583
Halawy SA, Osman AI, Nasr M, Rooney DW (2022) Mg-O-F nanocomposite catalysts defend against global warming via the efficient, dynamic, and rapid capture of CO2 at different temperatures under ambient pressure. ACS Omega 7(43):38856–38868. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c04587
Han G, Chung TS, Weber M, Maletzko C (2018) Low-pressure nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes for effective fractionation of dyes and inorganic salts in textile wastewater. Environ Sci Technol 52(6):3676–3684. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06518
Hashim N, Kamarudin S, Daud W (2009) Design, fabrication and testing of a PMMA-based passive single-cell and a multi-cell stack micro-DMFC. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34(19):8263–8269
Hasnaoui H, Krea M, Roizard D (2017) Neural networks for the prediction of polymer permeability to gases. J Membr Sci 541:541–549
Hassan ST, Batool B, Sadiq M, Zhu B (2022) How do green energy investment, economic policy uncertainty, and natural resources affect greenhouse gas emissions? a Markov-switching equilibrium approach. Environ Impact Assess Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106887
Hassan ST, Khan D, Zhu B, Batool B (2022) Is public service transportation increase environmental contamination in China? the role of nuclear energy consumption and technological change. Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121890
He XP, Wang T, Huang JH, Chen JX, Li JD (2020) Fabrication and characterization of superhydrophobic PDMS composite membranes for efficient ethanol recovery via pervaporation. Sep Purif Technol 241:116675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116675
Heinzel A, Barragan V (1999) A review of the state-of-the-art of the methanol crossover in direct methanol fuel cells. J Power Sour 84(1):70–74
Holloway RW, Achilli A, Cath TY (2015) The osmotic membrane bioreactor: a critical review. Environ Sci: Water Res Technol 1(5):581–605
Hong HS, Chen LX, Zhang QW, He F (2012) The structure and pervaporation properties for acetic acid/water of polydimethylsiloxane composite membranes. Mater Des 34:732–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2011.06.041
Hosseini SE (2020) An outlook on the global development of renewable and sustainable energy at the time of COVID-19. Energy Res Soc Sci 68:101633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101633
Hou Y, Xu Y, Li H, Li Y, Niu QJ (2019) Polyvinyl Butyral/Modified SiO2 nanoparticle membrane for gasoline desulfurization by pervaporation. Chem Eng Technol 42(1):65–72
Hu JH, Kim CS, Halasz P, Kim JF, Kim J, Szekely G (2021) Artificial intelligence for performance prediction of organic solvent nanofiltration membranes. J Membr Sci 619:118513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118513
Hu SY, Zhang YF, Lawless D, Feng XS (2012) Composite membranes comprising of polyvinylamine-poly(vinyl alcohol) incorporated with carbon nanotubes for dehydration of ethylene glycol by pervaporation. J Membr Sci 417:34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2012.06.010
Huang H, Young TA, Schwab KJ, Jacangelo JG (2012) Mechanisms of virus removal from secondary wastewater effluent by low pressure membrane filtration. J Membr Sci 409:1–8
Huang K-X, Vadiveloo A, Zhou J-L, Yang L, Chen D-Z, Gao F (2023) Integrated culture and harvest systems for improved microalgal biomass production and wastewater treatment. Biores Technol 376:128941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2023.128941
Huang K, Reber KP, Toomey MD, Haflich H, Howarter JA, Shah AD (2019) Reactivity of the polyamide membrane monomer with free chlorine: reaction kinetics, mechanisms, and the role of chloride. Environ Sci Technol 53(14):8167–8176
Hyder MN, Chen P (2009) Pervaporation dehydration of ethylene glycol with chitosan-poly(vinyl alcohol) blend membranes: Effect of CS-PVA blending ratios. J Membr Sci 340(1–2):171–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2009.05.021
Hyder MN, Huang RYM, Chen P (2009) Composite poly(vinyl alcohol)–poly(sulfone) membranes crosslinked by trimesoyl chloride: Characterization and dehydration of ethylene glycol–water mixtures. J Membr Sci 326(2):363–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2008.10.017
Idris A, Zain NM, Noordin M (2007) Synthesis, characterization and performance of asymmetric polyethersulfone (PES) ultrafiltration membranes with polyethylene glycol of different molecular weights as additives. Desalination 207(1–3):324–339
Islam MM, Chowdhury MAM, Begum RA, Amir AA (2022) A bibliometric analysis on the research trends of climate change effects on economic vulnerability. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 29(39):59300–59315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20028-0
Jafari A, Mortaheb HR, Gallucci F (2022) Performance of octadecylamine-functionalized graphene oxide nanosheets in polydimethylsiloxane mixed matrix membranes for removal of toluene from water by pervaporation. J Water Process Eng 45:102497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102497
Jafarinejad S (2021) Forward osmosis membrane technology for nutrient removal/recovery from wastewater: Recent advances, proposed designs, and future directions. Chemosphere 263:128116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128116
Jafarinejad S, Park H, Mayton H, Walker SL, Jiang SC (2019) Concentrating ammonium in wastewater by forward osmosis using a surface modified nanofiltration membrane. Environ Sci-Water Res Technol 5(2):246–255. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8ew00690c
Jafarzadeh Y, Yegani R (2015) Analysis of fouling mechanisms in TiO2 embedded high density polyethylene membranes for collagen separation. Chem Eng Res Des 93:684–695
Jee KY, Lee YT (2014) Preparation and characterization of siloxane composite membranes for -butanol concentration from ABE solution by pervaporation. J Membr Sci 456:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2013.12.061
Jesus DF, Leite MF, Silva LFM, Modesta RD, Matta VM, Cabral LMC (2007) Orange (Citrus sinensis) juice concentration by reverse osmosis. J Food Eng 81(2):287–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.06.014
Jiang L, Tu Y, Li X, Li H (2018) Application of reverse osmosis in purifying drinking water, E3S web of conferences. (EDP Sciences)
Jiao Y, Yan M, Wang X, Zhong J, Chen Y, Zhu W, Li X, Zhu Z, Cui P, Lu Y, Wang Y (2023) Economic, environmental, energy and exergy analysis and multi-objective optimization for efficient purification of a friendly gasoline additive by extractive distillation coupled with pervaporation. Fuel 335:127069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.127069
Jimenez-Solomon MF, Song Q, Jelfs KE, Munoz-Ibanez M, Livingston AG (2016) Polymer nanofilms with enhanced microporosity by interfacial polymerization. Nat Mater 15(7):760–767
Jones E, Qadir M, van Vliet MTH, Smakhtin V, Kang SM (2019) The state of desalination and brine production: a global outlook. Sci Total Environ 657:1343–1356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.076
Jose T, George SC, Thomas S (2020) Polymer nanocomposite membranes for pervaporation: an introduction. In: Polymer nanocomposite membranes for pervaporation. pp. 1–16. (Elsevier)
Joseph TM, Al-Hazmi HE, Sniatala B, Esmaeili A, Habibzadeh S (2023) Nanoparticles and nanofiltration for wastewater treatment: From polluted to fresh water. Environ Res 238(Pt 1):117114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.117114
Jye LW, Ismail AF (2017) Nanofiltration membranes: synthesis, characterization, and applications. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group
Jyothi MS, Reddy KR, Soontarapa K, Naveen S, Raghu AV, Kulkarni RV, Suhas DP, Shetti NP, Nadagouda MN, Aminabhavi TM (2019) Membranes for dehydration of alcohols via pervaporation. J Environ Manage 242:415–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.043
Jyoti G, Keshav A, Anandkumar J (2015) Review on pervaporation: theory, membrane performance, and application to intensification of esterification reaction. 2015
Kamali M, Appels L, Yu XB, Aminabhavi TM, Dewil R (2021) Artificial intelligence as a sustainable tool in wastewater treatment using membrane bioreactors. Chem Eng J 417:128070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.128070
Kang Y, Jang J, Kim S, Lim J, Lee Y, Kim IS (2020) PIP/TMC interfacial polymerization with electrospray: novel loose nanofiltration membrane for dye wastewater treatment. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 12(32):36148–36158
Karabelas A, Koutsou C, Kostoglou M, Sioutopoulos D (2018) Analysis of specific energy consumption in reverse osmosis desalination processes. Desalination 431:15–21
Kárászová M, Kacirková M, Friess K, Izák P (2014) Progress in separation of gases by permeation and liquids by pervaporation using ionic liquids: a review. Sep Purif Technol 132:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2014.05.008
Karthikeyan P, Banu HAT, Meenakshi S (2019) Removal of phosphate and nitrate ions from aqueous solution using La3+ incorporated chitosan biopolymeric matrix membrane. Int J Biol Macromol 124:492–504
Kayvani Fard A, McKay G, Buekenhoudt A, Al Sulaiti H, Motmans F, Khraisheh M, Atieh M (2018) Inorganic membranes: Preparation and application for water treatment and desalination. Materials 11(1):74
Khairul Zaman N, Jeng Yih L, Pui Vun C, Rohani R, Mohammad AW (2017) Recovery of organic acids from fermentation broth using nanofiltration technologies: a review. J Phys Sci 28(Suppl. 1):85–109
Kim C, Chandrasekaran A, Jha A, Ramprasad R (2019a) Active-learning and materials design: the example of high glass transition temperature polymers. Mrs Commun 9(3):860–866. https://doi.org/10.1557/mrc.2019.78
Kim C, Pilania G, Ramprasad R (2016) From organized high-throughput data to phenomenological theory using machine learning: the example of dielectric breakdown. Chem Mater 28(5):1304–1311. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b04109
Kim DG, Takigawa T, Kashino T, Burtovyy O, Bell A, Register RA (2015) Hydroxyhexafluoroisopropylnorbornene block and random copolymers via vinyl addition polymerization and their application as biobutanol pervaporation membranes. Chem Mater 27(19):6791–6801. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b03030
Kim HW, Park HB (2011) Gas diffusivity, solubility and permeability in polysulfone–poly (ethylene oxide) random copolymer membranes. J Membr Sci 372(1–2):116–124
Kim J, Park K, Yang DR, Hong S (2019b) A comprehensive review of energy consumption of seawater reverse osmosis desalination plants. Appl Energy 254:113652
Kim JH, Cook M, Peeva L, Yeo J, Bolton LW, Lee YM, Livingston AG (2020) Low energy intensity production of fuel-grade bio-butanol enabled by membrane-based extraction. Energy Environ Sci 13(12):4862–4871. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ee02927k
Kuila SB, Ray SK, Das P, Singha NR (2011) Synthesis of full interpenetrating network membranes of poly(acrylic acid-co-acrylamide) in the matrix of polyvinyl alcohol for dehydration of ethylene glycol by pervaporation. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 50(4):391–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2011.02.011
Kujawa J, Cerneaux S, Kujawski W (2015) Highly hydrophobic ceramic membranes applied to the removal of volatile organic compounds in pervaporation. Chem Eng J 260:43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.08.092
Kumakiri I, Yamaguchi T, Nakao S-i (2000) Application of a zeolite A membrane to reverse osmosis process. J Chem Eng Jpn 33(2):333–336
Kumar D, Ladaniya MS, Gurjar M, Mendke S, Kumar S (2020) Osmotic membrane distillation for retention of antioxidant potential in Nagpur mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco) fruit juice concentrate. J Food Process Eng 43(1):e13096. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.13096
Kumar SA, Srinivasan G, Govindaradjane S (2022) A novel synergistic effect of TiO(2) and ZnO incorporation in PES-based thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membrane for treatment of textile wastewater. Environ Monit Assess 194(12):848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10525-7
Kuznetsov YP, Kruchinina EV, Baklagina YG, Khripunov AK, Tulupova OA (2007) Deep desalination of water by evaporation through polymeric membranes. Russ J Appl Chem 80(5):790–798. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1070427207050199
Kwak S-Y, Kim SH, Kim SS (2001) Hybrid organic/inorganic reverse osmosis (RO) membrane for bactericidal anti-fouling. 1. Preparation and characterization of TiO2 nanoparticle self-assembled aromatic polyamide thin-film-composite (TFC) membrane. Environ Sci Technol 35(11):2388–2394
L’Heureux A, Grolinger K, Elyamany HF, Capretz MAM (2017) Machine learning with big data: challenges and approaches. IEEE Access 5:7776–7797. https://doi.org/10.1109/Access.2017.2696365
Labban O, Liu C, Chong TH, Lienhard JH (2018) Relating transport modeling to nanofiltration membrane fabrication: navigating the permeability-selectivity trade-off in desalination pretreatment. J Membr Sci 554:26–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.02.053
Labella A, Molero R, Leiva-Rebollo R, Pérez-Recuerda R, Borrego JJ (2021) Identification, resistance to antibiotics and biofilm formation of bacterial strains isolated from a reverse osmosis system of a drinking water treatment plant. Sci Total Environ 774:145718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145718
Lalia BS, Kochkodan V, Hashaikeh R, Hilal N (2013) A review on membrane fabrication: structure, properties and performance relationship. Desalination 326:77–95
Lastra A, Gómez D, Romero J, Francisco JL, Luque S, Alvarez JR (2004) Removal of metal complexes by nanofiltration in a TCF pulp mill: technical and economic feasibility. J Membr Sci 242(1–2):97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.05.012
Lau W, Gray S, Matsuura T, Emadzadeh D, Chen JP, Ismail A (2015) A review on polyamide thin film nanocomposite (TFN) membranes: History, applications, challenges and approaches. Water Res 80:306–324
Lau W, Ismail A, Misdan N, Kassim M (2012) A recent progress in thin film composite membrane: a review. Desalination 287:190–199
Lecaros RLG, Ho SY, Tsai HA, Hung WS, Hu CC, Huang SH, Lee KR, Lai JY (2021) Ionically cross-linked sodium alginate and polyamidoamine dendrimers for ethanol/water separation through pervaporation. Sep Purif Technol 275:119125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.119125
Lee A, Elam JW, Darling SB (2016) Membrane materials for water purification: design, development, and application. Environ Sci: Water Res Technol 2(1):17–42
Lee H, Han J, Kim K, Kim J, Kim E, Shin H, Lee J-C (2019) Highly sulfonated polymer-grafted graphene oxide composite membranes for proton exchange membrane fuel cells. J Ind Eng Chem 74:223–232
Lee J, Shin Y, Boo C, Hong S (2023) Performance, limitation, and opportunities of acid-resistant nanofiltration membranes for industrial wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 666:121142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2022.121142
Lee JY, Lee JS, Lee JH (2020) High performance and thermally stable PDMS pervaporation membranes prepared using a phenyl-containing tri-functional crosslinker for -butanol recovery. Sep Purif Technol 235:116142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.116142
Lee YM, Kim K-Y, Jung C-h, Ho-Bum P, 2013. Preparation method of polybenzoxazoles by thermal rearrangement, polybenzoxazoles prepared thereby, and gas separation membrane comprising the same. Google Patents
Lei L, Lindbråthen A, Hillestad M, He X (2021) Carbon molecular sieve membranes for hydrogen purification from a steam methane reforming process. J Membr Sci 627:119241
Li BW, Yue R, Shen LG, Chen C, Li RJ, Xu YC, Zhang MJ, Hong HC, Lin HJ (2022) A novel method integrating response surface method with artificial neural network to optimize membrane fabrication for wastewater treatment. J Clean Prod 376:134236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134236
Li J, Chen XR, Qi BK, Luo JQ, Zhuang XJ, Su Y, Wan YH (2014) Continuous acetone-butanol-ethanol (ABE) fermentation with in situ solvent recovery by silicalite-1 filled PDMS/PAN composite membrane. Energy Fuels 28(1):555–562. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef401706k
Li J et al (2023a) Optimizing hydrogen production by alkaline water decomposition with transition metal-based electrocatalysts. Environ Chem Lett 21:2583–2617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01616-z
Li J, Lim K, Yang H, Ren Z, Raghavan S, Chen P-Y, Buonassisi T, Wang X (2020) AI applications through the whole life cycle of material discovery. Matter 3(2):393–432
Li J, Zhang GJ, Ji SL, Wang NX, An W (2012) Layer-by-layer assembled nanohybrid multilayer membranes for pervaporation dehydration of acetone-water mixtures. J Membr Sci 415:745–757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2012.05.066
Li L, Dong J, Nenoff TM, Lee R (2004) Desalination by reverse osmosis using MFI zeolite membranes. J Membr Sci 243(1–2):401–404
Li L, Hou JW, Ye Y, Mansouri J, Chen V (2017) Composite PVA/PVDF pervaporation membrane for concentrated brine desalination: Salt rejection, membrane fouling and defect control. Desalination 422:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.08.011
Li M, Zhu Z, Zhou M, Jie X, Wang L, Kang G, Cao Y (2021) Removal of CO2 from biogas by membrane contactor using PTFE hollow fibers with smaller diameter. J Membr Sci 627:119232
Li SY, Cai YH, Schafer AI, Richards BS (2019) Renewable energy powered membrane technology: a review of the reliability of photovoltaic-powered membrane system components for brackish water desalination. Appl Energy 253:113524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113524
Li Y, Thomas ER, Molina MH, Mann S, Walker WS, Lind ML, Perreault F (2023b) Desalination by membrane pervaporation: a review. Desalination 547:116223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2022.116223
Liang W, Kaiser A, Feldhoff A, Baumann S, Meulenberg WA, Hu T, Xue J, Jiang H, Cao Z, Caro J (2023) Stable Ce0.8Gd0.2O2-δ oxygen transport membrane reactor for hydrogen production. Appl Catal A: Gen 650:118980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2022.118980
Lim YJ, Goh K, Kurihara M, Wang R (2021) Seawater desalination by reverse osmosis: current development and future challenges in membrane fabrication? a review. J Membr Sci 629:119292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119292
Lin C-Y, Lin S-A (2007) Effects of emulsification variables on fuel properties of two-and three-phase biodiesel emulsions. Fuel 86(1–2):210–217
Lin H, Freeman BD (2004) Gas solubility, diffusivity and permeability in poly (ethylene oxide). J Membr Sci 239(1):105–117
Lin H, Freeman BD (2005) Materials selection guidelines for membranes that remove CO2 from gas mixtures. J Mol Struct 739(1–3):57–74
Lin J, Tang CY, Ye W, Sun S-P, Hamdan SH, Volodin A, Haesendonck CV, Sotto A, Luis P, Van der Bruggen B (2015) Unraveling flux behavior of superhydrophilic loose nanofiltration membranes during textile wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 493:690–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.07.018
Lin JY, Ye WY, Baltaru MC, Tang YP, Bernstein NJ, Gao P, Balta S, Vlad M, Volodin A, Sotto A, Luis P, Zydney AL, Van der Bruggen B (2016) Tight ultrafiltration membranes for enhanced separation of dyes and NaSO during textile wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 514:217–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.04.057
Lin W-H, Chung T-S (2001) Gas permeability, diffusivity, solubility, and aging characteristics of 6FDA-durene polyimide membranes. J Membr Sci 186(2):183–193
Lin WY, **g L, Zhu ZW, Cai QH, Zhang BY (2017) Removal of heavy metals from mining wastewater by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF): experimental investigation and monte carlo-based artificial neural network modeling. Water Air Soil Pollut 228(6):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-017-3386-5
Liu C, Dong G, Tsuru T, Matsuyama H (2021) Organic solvent reverse osmosis membranes for organic liquid mixture separation: a review. J Membr Sci 620:118882
Liu G, ** W (2021a) Pervaporation membrane materials: Recent trends and perspectives. J Membr Sci 636:119557
Liu GP, ** WQ (2021) Pervaporation membrane materials: recent trends and perspectives. J Membr Sci 636:119557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119557
Liu L, Kentish SE (2018) Pervaporation performance of crosslinked PVA membranes in the vicinity of the glass transition temperature. J Membr Sci 553:63–69
Liu TL, Liu LY, Cui FC, Ding F, Zhang QF, Li YQ (2020a) Predicting the performance of polyvinylidene fluoride, polyethersulfone and polysulfone filtration membranes using machine learning. J Mater Chem A 8(41):21862–21871. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ta07607d
Liu W, Guo HX, Ji SL, Niu HJ, Li JR (2015) A new PDMS-b-PPO block copolymer membrane with novel—structure towards high flux for alcohol permselective pervaporation. Express Polym Lett 9(4):372–383. https://doi.org/10.3144/expresspolymlett.2015.35
Liu W, Jiang S-D, Yan Y, Wang W, Li J, Leng K, Japip S, Liu J, Xu H, Liu Y (2020b) A solution-processable and ultra-permeable conjugated microporous thermoset for selective hydrogen separation. Nat Commun 11(1):1633
Liu Y, Sim J, Hailemariam RH, Lee J, Rho H, Park K-D, Kim DW, Woo YC (2022) Status and future trends of hollow fiber biogas separation membrane fabrication and modification techniques. Chemosphere 303:134959
Liu Y, Wen J, Gao Y, Li T, Wang H, Yan H, Niu B, Guo R (2018) Antibacterial graphene oxide coatings on polymer substrate. Appl Surf Sci 436:624–630
Liu Y, Zhao T, Ju W, Shi S (2017) Materials discovery and design using machine learning. J Materiomics 3(3):159–177
Loeb S, Sourirajan S (1962) Sea water demineralization by means of an osmotic membrane. ACS Publications
Lu SY, Chiu CP, Huang HY (2000) Pervaporation of acetic acid/water mixtures through silicalite filled polydimethylsiloxane membranes. J Membr Sci 176(2):159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(00)00434-8
Lu X, Huang J, Pinelo M, Chen G, Wan Y, Luo J (2022a) Modelling and optimization of pervaporation membrane modules: a critical review. J Membr Sci, 121084.
Lu XT, Huang JC, Pinelo M, Chen GQ, Wan YH, Luo JQ (2022) Modelling and optimization of pervaporation membrane modules: a critical review. J Membr Sci 664:121084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2022.121084
Luo J, Wan Y (2013) Effects of pH and salt on nanofiltration—a critical review. J Membr Sci 438:18–28
Luo Y, Tan SJ, Wang H, Wu FW, Liu XM, Li L, Zhang ZB (2008) PPMS composite membranes for the concentration of organics from aqueous solutions by pervaporation. Chem Eng J 137(3):496–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2007.05.002
Ma X, Zhu Z, Shi W, Ji W, Li J, Wang Y, Pinnau I (2021) Unprecedented gas separation performance of a difluoro-functionalized triptycene-based ladder PIM membrane at low temperature. J Mater Chem A 9(9):5404–5414
Madaeni SS, Hasankiadeh NT, Kurdian AR, Rahimpour A (2010) Modeling and optimization of membrane fabrication using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. Sep Purif Technol 76(1):33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2010.09.017
Maleki R, Shams SM, Chellehbari YM, Rezvantalab S, Jahromi AM, Asadnia M, Abbassi R, Aminabhavi T, Razmjou A (2022) Materials discovery of ion-selective membranes using artificial intelligence. Commun Chem 5(1):132. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42004-022-00744-x
Mallakpour S, Azadi E (2021) Nanofiltration membranes for food and pharmaceutical industries. Emerg Mater 5(5):1329–1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42247-021-00290-7
Mallakpour S, Azadi E, Hussain CM (2023) Emerging membrane technologies and disinfection methods for efficient removal of waterborne pathogens during the COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic. New J Chem 47(1):17–40. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2NJ04017D
Mangindaan DW, Woon NM, Shi GM, Chung TS (2015) P84 polyimide membranes modified by a tripodal amine for enhanced pervaporation dehydration of acetone. Chem Eng Sci 122:14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2014.09.014
Mänttäri M, Nyström M, Nuortila-Jokinen J, Kallioinen M (2021) Nanofiltration in the pulp and paper industry. Nanofiltration 2:599–620
Maroufi N, Hajilary N (2023) Nanofiltration membranes types and application in water treatment: a review. Sustain Water Resour Manag 9(5):142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-023-00899-y
Matin A, Laoui T, Falath W, Farooque M (2021) Fouling control in reverse osmosis for water desalination & reuse: current practices & emerging environment-friendly technologies. Sci Total Environ 765:142721
Matin A, Rahman F, Shafi HZ, Zubair SM (2019) Scaling of reverse osmosis membranes used in water desalination: phenomena, impact, and control; future directions. Desalination 455:135–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2018.12.009
Matta VM, Moretti RH, Cabral LMC (2004) Microfiltration and reverse osmosis for clarification and concentration of acerola juice. J Food Eng 61(3):477–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(03)00154-7
McMordie Stoughton K, Duan X, Wendel EM (2013) Reverse osmosis optimization. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Mengesha A, Sahu O (2022) Sustainability of membrane separation technology on groundwater reverse osmosis process. Clean Eng Technol 7:100457
Merkel T, Gupta R, Turk B, Freeman B (2001) Mixed-gas permeation of syngas components in poly (dimethylsiloxane) and poly (1-trimethylsilyl-1-propyne) at elevated temperatures. J Membr Sci 191(1–2):85–94
Merkel TC, Lin H, Wei X, Baker R (2010) Power plant post-combustion carbon dioxide capture: an opportunity for membranes. J Membr Sci 359(1–2):126–139
Mittal S, Gupta A, Srivastava S, Jain M (2021) Artificial neural network based modeling of the vacuum membrane distillation process: effects of operating parameters on membrane fouling. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 164:108403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2021.108403
Mohammad AW, Teow YH, Ang WL, Chung YT, Oatley-Radcliffe DL, Hilal N (2015) Nanofiltration membranes review: recent advances and future prospects. Desalination 356:226–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.10.043
Molnar C, Casalicchio G, Bischl B (2020) Interpretable machine learning–a brief history, state-of-the-art and challenges, Joint European conference on machine learning and knowledge discovery in databases. (Springer)
Murali RS, Sankarshana T, Sridhar S (2013) Air separation by polymer-based membrane technology. Sep Purif Rev 42(2):130–186
Nagy E, Mizsey P, Hancsók J, Boldyryev S, Varbanov P (2015) Analysis of energy saving by combination of distillation and pervaporation for biofuel production. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 98:86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2015.10.010
Naim M, Elewa M, El-Shafei A, Moneer A (2015) Desalination of simulated seawater by purge-air pervaporation using an innovative fabricated membrane. Water Sci Technol 72(5):785–793. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.277
Nambikkattu J, Kaleekkal NJ, Sudarshan C (2022) Thin-film nanocomposite membranes for water treatment. In: Nano-Enabled Technologies for Water Remediation. p 169–214. (Elsevier)
Narbaitz RM, Rana D, Dang HT, Morrissette J, Matsuura T, Jasim SY, Tabe S, Yang P (2013) Pharmaceutical and personal care products removal from drinking water by modified cellulose acetate membrane: field testing. Chem Eng J 225:848–856
Nath K, Dave HK, Patel TM (2018) Revisiting the recent applications of nanofiltration in food processing industries: progress and prognosis. Trends Food Sci Technol 73:12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.01.001
Nayak JK, Shankar U, Samal K (2023) Fabrication and development of SPEEK/PVdF-HFP/SiO2 proton exchange membrane for microbial fuel cell application. Chem Eng J Adv 14:100459
Nie JX, Huang HG, Rao P, Chen H, Du X, Wang ZH, Zhang WX, Liang H (2023) Composite functional particle enhanced gravity driven ceramic membrane bioreactor for simultaneous removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from groundwater. Chem Eng J 452:139134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.139134
Nimir W, Al-Othman A, Tawalbeh M, Al Makky A, Ali A, Karimi-Maleh H, Karimi F, Karaman C (2023) Approaches towards the development of heteropolyacid-based high temperature membranes for PEM fuel cells. Int J Hydrogen Energy 48(17):6638–6656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.11.174
Nishikawa N, Ishibashi M, Ohta H, Akutsu N, Matsumoto H, Kamata T, Kitamura H (1995) CO2 removal by hollow-fiber gas-liquid contactor. Energy Convers Manage 36(6–9):415–418
Niu C, Li X, Dai R, Wang Z (2022) Artificial intelligence-incorporated membrane fouling prediction for membrane-based processes in the past 20 years: a critical review. Water Res 216:118299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.118299
Nunes SP, Culfaz-Emecen PZ, Ramon GZ, Visser T, Koops GH, ** WQ, Ulbricht M (2020) Thinking the future of membranes: perspectives for advanced and new membrane materials and manufacturing processes. J Membr Sci 598:117761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117761
Ogungbemi E, Ijaodola O, Khatib FN, Wilberforce T, El Hassan Z, Thompson J, Ramadan M, Olabi AG (2019) Fuel cell membranes–Pros and cons. Energy 172:155–172
Oh SJ, Kim N, Lee YT (2009) Preparation and characterization of PVDF/TiO2 organic–inorganic composite membranes for fouling resistance improvement. J Membr Sci 345(1–2):13–20
Olivares Moreno CA, Altintas Z (2022) Bioselective PES membranes based on chitosan functionalization and virus-imprinted NanoMIPs for highly efficient separation of human pathogenic viruses from water. Membranes (basel) 12(11):1117. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12111117
Osat M, Shojaati F, Hafizi A (2022) Optimization and improvement of a conventional tri-reforming reactor to an energy efficient membrane reactor for hydrogen production. Chem Eng Process-Process Intensif 175:108933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2022.108933
Osman AI, Lai ZY, Farghali M, Yiin CL, Elgarahy AM, Hammad A, Ihara I, Al-Fatesh AS, Rooney DW, Yap P-S (2023) Optimizing biomass pathways to bioenergy and biochar application in electricity generation, biodiesel production, and biohydrogen production. Environ Chem Lett 21(5):2639–2705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01613-2
Pal P (2020) Chapter 1—Introduction to membrane materials, processes, and modules. In: Membrane-Based Technologies for Environmental Pollution Control. (Ed. P Pal) pp. 3–69. (Butterworth-Heinemann)
Pan SY, Haddad AZ, Kumar A, Wang SW (2020) Brackish water desalination using reverse osmosis and capacitive deionization at the water-energy nexus. Water Res 183:116064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116064
Pangarkar BL, Sane MG, Guddad M (2011) Reverse osmosis and membrane distillation for desalination of groundwater: a review. Int Sch Res Not 2011
Pap N, Kertesz S, Pongracz E, Myllykoski L, Keiski RL, Vatai G, Laszlo Z, Beszedes S, Hodur C (2009) Concentration of blackcurrant juice by reverse osmosis. Desalination 241(1–3):256–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2008.01.069
Park HB, Kamcev J, Robeson LM, Elimelech M, Freeman BD (2017) Maximizing the right stuff: the trade-off between membrane permeability and selectivity. Science 356(6343):0530. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab0530
Park S, Baek SS, Pyo J, Pachepsky Y, Park J, Cho KH (2019) Deep neural networks for modeling fouling growth and flux decline during NF/RO membrane filtration. J Membr Sci 587:117164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.06.004
Patel N, Dhasmana A, Kumari S, Sharma R, Nayanam S, Malik S (2023) Nanofiltration applications for potable water, treatment, and reuse. In: Advanced and innovative approaches of environmental biotechnology in industrial wastewater treatment. p 135–146. (Springer)
Pazouki P, Sidhu JPS, Ipe DS, Pype ML, Wohlsen TD, Helfer F, Bertone E, Stewart RA (2022) Seawater dilution desalination with hybrid FO-RO and UF-RO: characterisation and assessment of pathogen removal efficacy. Desalination 525:115509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2021.115509
Peighambardoust SJ, Rowshanzamir S, Amjadi M (2010) Review of the proton exchange membranes for fuel cell applications. Int J Hydrogen Energy 35(17):9349–9384
Peng M, Vane LM, Liu SX (2003) Recent advances in VOCs removal from water by pervaporation. J Hazard Mater 98(1–3):69–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3894(02)00360-6
Peng N, Widjojo N, Sukitpaneenit P, Teoh MM, Lipscomb GG, Chung T-S, Lai J-Y (2012) Evolution of polymeric hollow fibers as sustainable technologies: Past, present, and future. Prog Polym Sci 37(10):1401–1424
Peng P, Lan Y, Liang L, Jia K (2021) Membranes for bioethanol production by pervaporation. Biotechnol Biofuels 14(1):1–33
Pereira MJ, Brazinha C, Crespo JG (2022) Pervaporation recovery of valuable aromas from by-products of the seafood industry: modelling of fractionated condensation for off-flavour removal. Sep Purif Technol 286:120441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120441
Perez EV, Balkus KJ Jr, Ferraris JP, Musselman IH (2009) Mixed-matrix membranes containing MOF-5 for gas separations. J Membr Sci 328(1–2):165–173
Perry KA, Eisman GA, Benicewicz BC (2008) Electrochemical hydrogen pum** using a high-temperature polybenzimidazole (PBI) membrane. J Power Sour 177(2):478–484
Peters T (2010) Membrane technology for water treatment. Chem Eng Technol 33(8):1233–1240. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201000139
Pinelo M, Jonsson G, Meyer AS (2009) Membrane technology for purification of enzymatically produced oligosaccharides: molecular and operational features affecting performance. Sep Purif Technol 70(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2009.08.010
Pittia P, Mastrocola D, Nicoli MC (2005) Effect of colloidal properties of oil-in-water emulsions on ethanol liquid–vapour partition. Food Res Int 38(5):585–595
Prajapati PK, Kansara AM, Aswal VK, Singh PS (2019) High oxygen permeable Zeolite-4A poly (dimethylsiloxane) membrane for air separation. J Appl Polym Sci 136(42):48047
Prihatiningtyas I, Van der Bruggen B (2020) Nanocomposite pervaporation membrane for desalination. Chem Eng Res Des 164:147–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2020.10.005
Qadeer K, Al-Hinai A, Chuah LF, Sial NR, AaH A-M, Al-Abri R, Qyyum MA, Lee M (2023) Methanol production and purification via membrane-based technology: recent advancements, challenges and the way forward. Chemosphere 335:139007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139007
Qiu D, Peng L, Lai X, Ni M, Lehnert W (2019) Mechanical failure and mitigation strategies for the membrane in a proton exchange membrane fuel cell. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 113:109289
Raihan A, Pavel MI, Muhtasim DA, Farhana S, Faruk O, Paul A (2023) The role of renewable energy use, technological innovation, and forest cover toward green development: evidence from Indonesia. Innov Green Dev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.igd.2023.100035
Rall D, Schweidtmann AM, Kruse M, Evdochenko E, Mitsos A, Wessling M (2020) Multi-scale membrane process optimization with high-fidelity ion transport models through machine learning. J Membr Sci 608:118208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118208
Rambabu K, Bharath G, Monash P, Velu S, Banat F, Naushad M, Arthanareeswaran G, Show PL (2019) Effective treatment of dye polluted wastewater using nanoporous CaCl2 modified polyethersulfone membrane. Process Saf Environ Prot 124:266–278
Rana D, Matsuura T (2010) Surface modifications for antifouling membranes. Chem Rev 110(4):2448–2471
Raza W, Wang JX, Yang JH, Tsuru T (2021) Progress in pervaporation membranes for dehydration of acetic acid. Sep Purif Technol 262:118338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118338
Reid C, Breton E (1959) Water and ion flow across cellulosic membranes. J Appl Polym Sci 1(2):133–143
Reijerkerk SR, Ijzer AC, Nijmeijer K, Arun A, Gaymans RJ, Wessling M (2010) Subambient temperature CO2 and light gas permeation through segmented block copolymers with tailored soft phase. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2(2):551–560
Rendón-Castrillón L, Ramírez-Carmona M, Ocampo-López C, González-López F, Cuartas-Uribe B, Mendoza-Roca JA (2023) Treatment of water from the textile industry contaminated with indigo dye: a hybrid approach combining bioremediation and nanofiltration for sustainable reuse. Case Stud Chem Environ Eng 8:100498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100498
Rezakazemi M, Shahverdi M, Shirazian S, Mohammadi T, Pak A (2011) CFD simulation of water removal from water/ethylene glycol mixtures by pervaporation. Chem Eng J 168(1):60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.12.034
Rice G, Kentish S, Vivekanand V, O’Connor A, Stevens G, Barber A (2005) Membrane-based dairy separation: a comparison of nanofiltration and electrodialysis. Dev Chem Eng Miner Process 13(1–2):43–54
Ritt CL, Liu M, Pham TA, Epsztein R, Kulik HJ, Elimelech M (2022) Machine learning reveals key ion selectivity mechanisms in polymeric membranes with subnanometer pores. Sci Adv 8(2):eabl5771. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abl5771
Robeson LM (2008) The upper bound revisited. J Membr Sci 320(1–2):390–400
Rodrigues RB, Menezes HC, Cabral LMC, Dornier M, Rios GM, Reynes M (2004) Evaluation of reverse osmosis and osmotic evaporation to concentrate camu-camu juice (Myrciaria dubia). J Food Eng 63(1):97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2003.07.009
Roehl EA, Ladner DA, Daamen RC, Cook JB, Safarik J, Phipps DW, **e P (2018) Modeling fouling in a large RO system with artificial neural networks. J Membr Sci 552:95–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.01.064
Rolf J, Cao T, Huang X, Boo C, Li Q, Elimelech M (2022) Inorganic scaling in membrane desalination: models, mechanisms, and characterization methods. Environ Sci Technol 56(12):7484–7511. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c01858
Rosha P, Rosha AK, Ibrahim H, Kumar S (2021) Recent advances in biogas upgrading to value added products: a review. Int J Hydrogen Energy 46(41):21318–21337
Rostovtseva V, Faykov I, Pulyalina A (2022) A review of recent developments of pervaporation membranes for ethylene glycol purification. Membranes (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12030312
Rostovtseva V, Pulyalina A, Rudakova D, Vinogradova L, Polotskaya G (2020) Strongly selective polymer membranes modified with heteroarm stars for the ethylene glycol dehydration by pervaporation. Membranes (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes10050086
Roy S, Singha NR (2017) Polymeric nanocomposite membranes for next generation pervaporation process: Strategies, challenges and future prospects. Membranes 7(3):53
Ruan HM, Yang ZR, Lin JY, Shen JN, Ji JB, Gao CJ, Van der Bruggen B (2015) Biogas slurry concentration hybrid membrane process: pilot-testing and RO membrane cleaning. Desalination 368:171–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.04.015
Ruiz-García A, Ruiz-Saavedra E (2015) 80,000h operational experience and performance analysis of a brackish water reverse osmosis desalination plant. Assess Membr Repl Cost Desalin 375:81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.07.022
Ryckebosch E, Drouillon M, Vervaeren H (2011) Techniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane. Biomass Bioenerg 35(5):1633–1645
Saikia J, Sarmah S, Bora JJ, Das B, Goswamee RL (2019) Preparation and characterization of low cost flat ceramic membranes from easily available potters’ clay for dye separation. Bull Mater Sci 42:1–13
Salahodjaev R, Djalilov B, Kobiljonov I, Otajonov S, Kasimova N (2023) Industrialization and CO2 emissions: accounting for the role of renewable energy in OIC member states. Int J Energy Econ Policy 13(5):37–43
Saleh J, Tremblay AY, Dubé MA (2010) Glycerol removal from biodiesel using membrane separation technology. Fuel 89(9):2260–2266
Samanta HS, Ray SK (2015) Pervaporative recovery of acetone from water using mixed matrix blend membranes. Sep Purif Technol 143:52–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2015.01.015
Sarbatly R, Sariau J, Krishnaiah D (2023) Recent developments of membrane technology in the clarification and concentration of fruit juices. Food Eng Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-023-09346-2
Schäfer AI, Pihlajamäki A, Fane AG, Waite TD, Nyström M (2004) Natural organic matter removal by nanofiltration: effects of solution chemistry on retention of low molar mass acids versus bulk organic matter. J Membr Sci 242(1–2):73–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.05.018
Schantz AB, **ong BY, Dees E, Moore DR, Yang XJ, Kumar M (2018) Emerging investigators series: prospects and challenges for high-pressure reverse osmosis in minimizing concentrated waste streams. Environ Sci-Water Res Technol 4(7):894–908. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8ew00137e
Setiawan O, Abdi ZG, Weber M, Hung WS, Chung TS (2023) Employing sulfolane as a green solvent in the fabrication of nanofiltration membranes with excellent dye/salt separation performances for textile wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 685:121942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2023.121942
Shaari N, Kamarudin SK (2019) Recent advances in additive-enhanced polymer electrolyte membrane properties in fuel cell applications: an overview. Int J Energy Res 43(7):2756–2794
Shahverdi M, Baheri B, Rezakazemi M, Motaee E, Mohammadi T (2013) Pervaporation study of ethylene glycol dehydration through synthesized (PVA-4A)/polypropylene mixed matrix composite membranes. Polym Eng Sci 53(7):1487–1493. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.23406
Shao P, Huang RYM (2007) Polymeric membrane pervaporation. J Membr Sci 287(2):162–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2006.10.043
Shao P, Huang RYM, Feng X, Anderson W, Pal R, Burns CM (2005) Composite membranes with an integrated skin layer: preparation, structural characteristics and pervaporation performance. J Membr Sci 254(1–2):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.08.034
Shehata N, Egirani D, Olabi AG, Inayat A, Abdelkareem MA, Chae KJ, Sayed ET (2023) Membrane-based water and wastewater treatment technologies: Issues, current trends, challenges, and role in achieving sustainable development goals, and circular economy. Chemosphere 320:137993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.137993
Shenvi SS, Isloor AM, Ismail A (2015) A review on RO membrane technology: developments and challenges. Desalination 368:10–26
Shim J, Park S, Cho KH (2021) Deep learning model for simulating influence of natural organic matter in nanofiltration. Water Res 197:117070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.117070
Shirazi Y, Ghadimi A, Mohammadi T (2012) Recovery of alcohols from water using polydimethylsiloxane-silica nanocomposite membranes: characterization and pervaporation performance. J Appl Polym Sci 124(4):2871–2882. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.35313
Sholl DS, Lively RP (2016) Seven chemical separations to change the world. Nature 532(7600):435–437
Shon H, Phuntsho S, Chaudhary D, Vigneswaran S, Cho J (2013) Nanofiltration for water and wastewater treatment–a mini review. Drink Water Eng Sci 6(1):47–53
Sikander AB, Anjum T, Khan AL, Gilani MA, Raja AA, Yasin M (2022) Exploring the potential of highly selective deep eutectic solvents (DES) based membranes for dehydration of butanol via pervaporation. Chemosphere 305:135480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135480
Sikder S, Rahman MM (2023) Efficiency of microbial fuel cell in wastewater (municipal, textile and tannery) treatment and bioelectricity production. Case Stud Chem Environ Eng 8:100421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100421
Sjöman E, Mänttäri M, Nyström M, Koivikko H, Heikkilä H (2007) Separation of xylose from glucose by nanofiltration from concentrated monosaccharide solutions. J Membr Sci 292(1–2):106–115
Skuse C, Gallego-Schmid A, Azapagic A, Gorgojo P (2021) Can emerging membrane-based desalination technologies replace reverse osmosis? Desalination 500:114844
Slater CS, Savelski MJ, Moroz TM, Raymond MJ (2012) Pervaporation as a green drying process for tetrahydrofuran recovery in pharmaceutical synthesis. Green Chem Lett Rev 5(1):55–64
Song Q, Jiang S, Hasell T, Liu M, Sun S, Cheetham AK, Sivaniah E, Cooper AI (2016) Porous organic cage thin films and molecular-sieving membranes. Adv Mater 28(13):2629–2637
Sun D, Yang P, Sun HL, Li BB (2015) Preparation and characterization of cross-linked poly (vinyl alcohol)/hyperbranched polyester membrane for the pervaporation dehydration of ethylene glycol solution. Eur Polymer J 62:155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2014.11.027
Sundaran SP, Reshmi C, Sagitha P, Manaf O, Sujith A (2019) Multifunctional graphene oxide loaded nanofibrous membrane for removal of dyes and coliform from water. J Environ Manage 240:494–503
Szczuka A, Chuang Y-H, Chen FC, Zhang Z, Desormeaux E, Flynn M, Parodi J, Mitch WAJAE, Water T (2020) Removal of pathogens and chemicals of emerging concern by pilot-scale FO-RO hybrid units treating RO concentrate, graywater, and sewage for centralized and decentralized potable reuse. ACS ES&T Water. 1(1): 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.0c00006
Tang J, Sirkar KK, Majumdar S (2017) Pervaporative dehydration of concentrated aqueous solutions of selected polar organics by a perfluoropolymer membrane. Sep Purif Technol 175:122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2016.10.032
Tanveer M, Lim ES, Kim KY (2021) Effects of channel geometry and electrode architecture on reactant transportation in membraneless microfluidic fuel cells: a review. Fuel 298:120818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.120818
Tavangar T, Jalali K, Shahmirzadi MAA, Karimi M (2019) Toward real textile wastewater treatment: membrane fouling control and effective fractionation of dyes/inorganic salts using a hybrid electrocoagulation–nanofiltration process. Sep Purif Technol 216:115–125
Tavares T, Tavares J, Leon-Zerpa FA, Penate-Suarez B, Ramos-Martin A (2022) Assessment of processes to increase the useful life and the reuse of reverse osmosis elements in cape verde and macaronesia. Membranes (basel) 12(6):613. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12060613
Teoh GH, Jawad ZA, Ooi BS, Low SC (2022) Simultaneous water reclamation and nutrient recovery of aquaculture wastewater using membrane distillation. J Water Process Eng 46:102573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2022.102573
Tgarguifa A, Abderafi S, Bounahmidi T (2018) Energy efficiency improvement of a bioethanol distillery, by replacing a rectifying column with a pervaporation unit. Renew Energy 122:239–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.01.112
Thakur VK, Voicu SI (2016) Recent advances in cellulose and chitosan based membranes for water purification: a concise review. Carbohyd Polym 146:148–165
Thomassen M, Sheridan E, Kvello J (2010) Electrochemical hydrogen separation and compression using polybenzimidazole (PBI) fuel cell technology. J Natl Gas Sci Eng 2(5):229–234
Tian J, Zhao X, Gao S, Wang X, Zhang R (2021) Progress in research and application of nanofiltration (NF) technology for brackish water treatment. Membranes (basel) 11(9):662. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11090662
Trifunovic O, Lipnizki F, Trägårdh G (2006) The influence of process parameters on aroma recovery by hydrophobic pervaporation. Desalination 189(1–3):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.03.096
Tul Muntha S, Kausar A, Siddiq M (2017) Advances in polymeric nanofiltration membrane: a review. Polym-Plast Technol Eng 56(8):841–856
Turken T, Sengur-Tasdemir R, Sayinli B, Urper-Bayram GM, Ates-Genceli E, Tarabara VV, Koyuncu I (2019) Reinforced thin-film composite nanofiltration membranes: fabrication, characterization, and performance testing. J Appl Polym Sci 136(39):48001
Valappil RSK, Ghasem N, Al-Marzouqi M (2021) Current and future trends in polymer membrane-based gas separation technology: a comprehensive review. J Ind Eng Chem 98:103–129
Valentínyi N, Cséfalvay E, Mizsey P (2013) Modelling of pervaporation: parameter estimation and model development. Chem Eng Res Des 91(1):174–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2012.07.001
Van der Bruggen B, Mänttäri M, Nyström M (2008) Drawbacks of applying nanofiltration and how to avoid them: a review. Sep Purif Technol 63(2):251–263
Van Voorthuizen E, Ashbolt N, Schäfer A (2001) Role of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions for initial enteric virus retention by MF membranes. J Membr Sci 194(1):69–79
Vane LM (2013) Pervaporation and vapor permeation tutorial: membrane processes for the selective separation of liquid and vapor mixtures. Sep Sci Technol 48(3):429–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2012.725792
Vasanth D, Prasad A (2019) Ceramic membrane: synthesis and application for wastewater treatment—a review. Water Res Environ Eng II: Clim Environ, 101–106.
Venna SR, Carreon MA (2015) Metal organic framework membranes for carbon dioxide separation. Chem Eng Sci 124:3–19
Volkov VV, Fadeev AG, Khotimsky VS, Litvinova EG, Selinskaya YA, McMillan JD, Kelley SS (2004) Effects of synthesis conditions on the pervaporation properties of poly[1-(trimethylsilyl)-1-propyne] useful for membrane bioreactors. J Appl Polym Sci 91(4):2271–2277. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.13358
Wang J, Tian K, Li D, Chen M, Feng X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, van der Bruggen B (2023a) Machine learning in gas separation membrane develo**: ready for prime time. Sep Purif Technol 313:123493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.123493
Wang W, Hong G, Zhang Y, Yang X, Hu N, Zhang J, Sorokin P, Shao L (2023b) Designing an energy-efficient multi-stage selective electrodialysis process based on high-performance materials for lithium extraction. J Membr Sci 675:121534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2023.121534
Wang Y, Pan Z, Zhang WX, Huang SC, Yu GJ, Soltanian MR, Lichtfouse E, Zhang Z (2023c) Higher efficiency and lower environmental impact of membrane separation for carbon dioxide capture in coal power plants. Environ Chem Lett 21(4):1951–1958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01596-0
Wang J, Zhang Y, Zhu J, Hou J, Liu J, Van der Bruggen B (2016a) Zwitterionic functionalized layered double hydroxides nanosheets for a novel charged mosaic membrane with high salt permeability. J Membr Sci 510:27–37
Wang Q, Li N, Bolto B, Hoang M, **e Z (2016b) Desalination by pervaporation: a review. Desalination 387:46–60
Wang X, Dou L, Li Z, Yang L, Yu J, Ding B (2016c) Flexible hierarchical ZrO2 nanoparticle-embedded SiO2 nanofibrous membrane as a versatile tool for efficient removal of phosphate. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8(50):34668–34676
Wang L, Wang Y, Wu L, Wei G (2020a) Fabrication, properties, performances, and separation application of polymeric pervaporation membranes: a review. Polymers 12(7):1466. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12071466
Wang Y, Seo B, Wang BW, Zamel N, Jiao K, Adroher XC (2020b) Fundamentals, materials, and machine learning of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell technology. Energy and Ai 1:100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyai.2020.100014
Wang SY, Liu H, Gu J, Sun HF, Zhang M, Liu Y (2019) Technology feasibility and economic viability of an innovative integrated ceramic membrane bioreactor and reverse osmosis process for producing ultrapure water from municipal wastewater. Chem Eng J 375:122078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.122078
Wang Y-N, Wang R (2019) Reverse osmosis membrane separation technology. In: Membrane separation principles and applications. pp. 1–45. (Elsevier)
Wang Y, Chung TS, Neo BW, Gruender M (2011) Processing and engineering of pervaporation dehydration of ethylene glycol via dual-layer polybenzimidazole (PBI)/polyetherimide (PEI) membranes. J Membr Sci 378(1–2):339–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2011.05.020
Wang Y, Widjojo N, Sukitpaneenit P, Chung TS (2013) Membrane pervaporation. Sep Purif Technol Biorefineries. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118493441.ch10
Wang Z, Wang Z, Lin S, ** H, Gao S, Zhu Y, ** J (2018) Nanoparticle-templated nanofiltration membranes for ultrahigh performance desalination. Nat Commun 9(1):2004. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04467-3
Wei XZ, Kong X, Wang SX, **ang H, Wang JD, Chen JY (2013) Removal of heavy metals from electroplating wastewater by thin-film composite nanofiltration hollow-fiber membranes. Ind Eng Chem Res 52(49):17583–17590. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie402387u
Wenten IG, Khoiruddin, (2016) Reverse osmosis applications: prospect and challenges. Desalination 391:112–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.12.011
Wills J, Moazzem S, Jegatheesan V (2019) Treating car wash wastewater by ceramic ultrafiltration membranes for reuse purposes. Water Scarcity and Ways to Reduce the Impact: Management Strategies and Technologies for Zero Liquid Discharge and Future Smart Cities, 63–73.
Wilson JF, Srinivasan SS, Moore BM, Henderson L, Ely S, Sharma P (2013) Hydrogen production using solar energy. J Undergrad Res Phys 1:1–7
Wojnarova P, Rusin J, Basinas P, Kostejn M, Nemec J, Stanovský P, Kim AS, Izak P (2023) Unveiling the potential of composite water-swollen spiral wound membrane for design of low-cost raw biogas purification. Sep Purif Technol 326:124783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.124783
Wu DH, Martin J, Du J, Zhang YF, Lawless D, Feng XS (2015) Thin film composite membranes comprising of polyamide and polydopamine for dehydration of ethylene glycol by pervaporation. J Membr Sci 493:622–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.07.016
Wu JK, Ye CC, Zhang WH, Wang NX, Lee KR, An QF (2019a) Construction of well-arranged graphene oxide/polyelectrolyte complex nanoparticles membranes for pervaporation ethylene glycol dehydration. J Membr Sci 577:104–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.02.004
Wu S, Kondo Y, Kakimoto MA, Yang B, Yamada H, Kuwajima I, Lambard G, Hongo K, Xu YB, Shiomi J, Schick C, Morikawa J, Yoshida R (2019) Machine-learning-assisted discovery of polymers with high thermal conductivity using a molecular design algorithm. NPJ Comput Mater 5(1):66. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-019-0203-2
**a W-J, Guo L-X, Yu L-Q, Zhang Q, **ong J-R, Zhu X-Y, Wang X-C, Huang B-C, ** R-C (2021) Phosphorus removal from diluted wastewaters using a La/C nanocomposite-doped membrane with adsorption-filtration dual functions. Chem Eng J 405:126924
Xu J, Feng XS, Chen PP, Gao CJ (2012) Development of an antibacterial copper (II)-chelated polyacrylonitrile ultrafiltration membrane. J Membr Sci 413:62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2012.04.004
Xu Q, Jiang J (2022) Recent development in machine learning of polymer membranes for liquid separation. Mol Syst Des Eng 7(8):856–872
Yadav D, Karki S, Ingole PG (2022) Current advances and opportunities in the development of nanofiltration (NF) membranes in the area of wastewater treatment, water desalination, biotechnological and pharmaceutical applications. J Environ Chem Eng 10(4):108109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.108109
Yadav M, Singh V, Sharma YC (2017) Methyl transesterification of waste cooking oil using a laboratory synthesized reusable heterogeneous base catalyst: process optimization and homogeneity study of catalyst. Energy Convers Manage 148:1438–1452
Yampolskii Y, Shishatskii S, Alentiev A, Loza K (1998) Group contribution method for transport property predictions of glassy polymers: focus on polyimides and polynorbornenes. J Membr Sci 149(2):203–220
Yang B-X, Shi J-H, Pramoda K, Goh SH (2008) Enhancement of the mechanical properties of polypropylene using polypropylene-grafted multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Compos Sci Technol 68(12):2490–2497
Yang J, Tong L, Alsubaie AS, Mahmoud KH, Guo Y, Liu L, Guo L, Sun Z, Wang C (2022) Hybrid proton exchange membrane used in fuel cell with amino-functionalized metal–organic framework in sulfonated polyimide to construct efficient ion transport channel. Adv Compos Hybrid Mater 5(2):834–842
Yang L, Zhang S, Wu H, Ye C, Liang X, Wang S, Wu X, Wu Y, Ren Y, Liu Y (2019a) Porous organosilicon nanotubes in pebax-based mixed-matrix membranes for biogas purification. J Membr Sci 573:301–308
Yang Y, Zhang H, Wang P, Zheng Q, Li J (2007) The influence of nano-sized TiO2 fillers on the morphologies and properties of PSF UF membrane. J Membr Sci 288(1–2):231–238
Yang Z, Guo H, Tang CY (2019b) The upper bound of thin-film composite (TFC) polyamide membranes for desalination. J Membr Sci 590:117297
Yang Z, Li LT, Jiang C, Zhao N, Zhang SH, Guo YL, Chen Y, Xue SM, Ji CH, Zhao SZ, Gonzales RR, Matsuyama H, **a JZ, Niu QJ (2021) Tailored thin film nanocomposite membrane incorporated with Noria for simultaneously overcoming the permeability-selectivity trade-off and the membrane fouling in nanofiltration process. J Membr Sci 640:119863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119863
Yang Z, Zhou Y, Feng Z, Rui X, Zhang T, Zhang Z (2019c) A review on reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes for water purification. Polymers 11(8):1252
Yao Y, Zhang P, Jiang C, DuChanois RM, Zhang X, Elimelech M (2021) High performance polyester reverse osmosis desalination membrane with chlorine resistance. Nat Sustain 4(2):138–146
Yave W, Car A, Funari SS, Nunes SP, Peinemann K-V (2010) CO2-philic polymer membrane with extremely high separation performance. Macromolecules 43(1):326–333
Yi SL, Wan YH (2017) Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) recovery from aqueous solutions via pervaporation with vinyltriethoxysilane-grafted-silicalite-1/polydimethylsiloxane mixed matrix membrane. Chem Eng J 313:1639–1646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.11.061
Yin H, Xu M, Luo Z, Bi X, Li J, Zhang S, Wang X (2022) Machine learning for membrane design and discovery. Green Energy Environ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gee.2022.12.001
Yin J, Deng B (2015) Polymer-matrix nanocomposite membranes for water treatment. J Membr Sci 479:256–275
Yuan Q, Longo M, Thornton AW, McKeown NB, Comesaña-Gándara B, Jansen JC, Jelfs KE (2021) Imputation of missing gas permeability data for polymer membranes using machine learning. J Membr Sci 627:119207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119207
Zacharof MP, Mandale SJ, Williams PM, Lovitt RW (2016) Nanofiltration of treated digested agricultural wastewater for recovery of carboxylic acids. J Clean Prod 112:4749–4761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.004
Zahmatkesh S, Rezakhani Y, Arabi A, Hasan M, Ahmad Z, Wang C, Sillanpaa M, Al-Bahrani M, Ghodrati I (2022) An approach to removing COD and BOD based on polycarbonate mixed matrix membranes that contain hydrous manganese oxide and silver nanoparticles: a novel application of artificial neural network based simulation in MATLAB. Chemosphere 308(Pt 2):136304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.136304
Zarzo D, Prats D (2018) Desalination and energy consumption. what can we expect in the near future? Desalination 427:1–9
Zeng C, Tanaka S, Suzuki Y, Fujii S (2017) Impact of feed water pH and membrane material on nanofiltration of perfluorohexanoic acid in aqueous solution. Chemosphere 183:599–604
Zhang C, Koros WJ (2017) Ultraselective carbon molecular sieve membranes with tailored synergistic sorption selective properties. Adv Mater 29(33):1701631
Zhang CM, Lu Y (2021) Study on artificial intelligence: The state of the art and future prospects. J Ind Inf Integr 23:100224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100224
Zhang H, He Q, Luo J, Wan Y, Darling SB (2020a) Sharpening nanofiltration: strategies for enhanced membrane selectivity. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 12(36):39948–39966. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c11136
Zhang H, Zhao Q, Zhou M, Cui P, Wang Y, Zheng S, Zhu Z, Gao J (2022a) Economic effect of an efficient and environmentally friendly extractive distillation/pervaporation process on the separation of ternary azeotropes with different compositions. J Clean Prod 346:119889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131179
Zhang J, She Q, Chang VW, Tang CY, Webster RD (2014) Mining nutrients (N, K, P) from urban source-separated urine by forward osmosis dewatering. Environ Sci Technol 48(6):3386–3394. https://doi.org/10.1021/es405266d
Zhang LL, Wang L, Wang NX, Guo HX, Zhang WH, Li XT, Ji SL, An QF (2020) Covalent organic frameworks hybird membrane with optimized mass transport nanochannel for aromatic/aliphatic mixture pervaporation. J Membr Sci 598:117652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117652
Zhang T, Li Z, Wang W, Wang Y, Gao B, Wang Z (2019) Enhanced antifouling and antimicrobial thin film nanocomposite membranes with incorporation of Palygorskite/titanium dioxide hybrid material. J Colloid Interface Sci 537:1–10
Zhang T, Zheng W, Wang Q, Wu Z, Wang Z (2023) Designed strategies of nanofiltration technology for Mg2+/Li+ separation from salt-lake brine: a comprehensive review. Desalination 546:116205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2022.116205
Zhang WX, Ying YP, Ma J, Guo XY, Huang HL, Liu DH, Zhong CL (2017) Mixed matrix membranes incorporated with polydopamine-coated metal-organic framework for dehydration of ethylene glycol by pervaporation. J Membr Sci 527:8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2017.01.001
Zhang X, Jiang J, Yuan F, Song W, Li J, **ng D, Zhao L, Dong W, Pan X, Gao X (2022b) Estimation of water footprint in seawater desalination with reverse osmosis process. Environ Res 204(Pt D):112374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112374
Zhang Y, Rhim JW, Feng XS (2013) Improving the stability of layer-by-layer self-assembled membranes for dehydration of alcohol and diol. J Membr Sci 444:22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2013.05.011
Zhao H, Song T, Ding X, Cai R, Tan X, Zhang Y (2023a) PIM-1 mixed matrix membranes incorporated with magnetic responsive cobalt-based ionic liquid for O2/N2 separation. J Membr Sci 679:121713
Zhao M, Zhang CL, Weng YX (2023) Improved artificial neural networks (ANNs) for predicting the gas separation performance of polyimides. J Membr Sci 681:121765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2023.121765
Zhao Q, Qian J, Zhu C, An Q, Xu T, Zheng Q, Song Y (2009) A novel method for fabricating polyelectrolyte complex/inorganic nanohybrid membranes with high isopropanol dehydration performance. J Membr Sci 345(1–2):233–241
Zhao S, Liao Z, Fane A, Li J, Tang C, Zheng C, Lin J, Kong L (2021) Engineering antifouling reverse osmosis membranes: a review. Desalination 499:114857
Zhao Z, Muylaert K, FJ Vankelecom I (2023b) Applying membrane technology in microalgae industry: A comprehensive review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 172:113041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.113041
Zheng JF, Zhao R, Uliana AA, Liu YY, Zhang DM, Zhang X, Xu DL, Gao QY, ** PR, Liu YL, Volodine A, Zhu JY, van der Bruggen B (2022) Separation of textile wastewater using a highly permeable resveratrol-based loose nanofiltration membrane with excellent anti-fouling performance. Chem Eng J 434:134705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.134705
Zhong S, Zhang K, Bagheri M, Burken JG, Gu A, Li B, Ma X, Marrone BL, Ren ZJ, Schrier J, Shi W, Tan H, Wang T, Wang X, Wong BM, **ao X, Yu X, Zhu JJ, Zhang H (2021) Machine learning: new ideas and tools in environmental science and engineering. Environ Sci Technol 55(19):12741–12754. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c01339
Zhou HL, Zhang JQ, Wan YH, ** WQ (2017) Fabrication of high silicalite-1 content filled PDMS thin composite pervaporation membrane for the separation of ethanol from aqueous solutions. J Membr Sci 524:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.11.029
Zhu J, Hou J, Zhang Y, Tian M, He T, Liu J, Chen V (2018) Polymeric antimicrobial membranes enabled by nanomaterials for water treatment. J Membr Sci 550:173–197
Zhu GH, Kim C, Chandrasekarn A, Everett JD, Ramprasad R, Lively RR (2020) Polymer genome-based prediction of gas permeabilities in polymers. J Polym Eng 40(6):451–457. https://doi.org/10.1515/polyeng-2019-0329
Zhu ZY, Li SH, Meng DP, Qi HQ, Zhao F, Li X, Cui PZ, Wang YL, Xu DM, Ma YX (2021) Energy efficient and environmentally friendly pervaporation-distillation hybrid process for ternary azeotrope purification. Comput Chem Eng 147:107236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2021.107236
Zhuang XJ, Chen XR, Su Y, Luo JQ, Feng SC, Zhou H, Wan YH (2016) Surface modification of silicalite-1 with alkoxysilanes to improve the performance of PDMS/silicalite-1 pervaporation membranes: Preparation, characterization and modeling. J Membr Sci 499:386–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.10.018
Zito PF, Brunetti A, Barbieri G (2022) Renewable biomethane production from biogas upgrading via membrane separation: Experimental analysis and multistep configuration design. Renew Energy 200:777–787
Acknowledgements
Dr. Ahmed I. Osman and Prof. David W. Rooney wish to acknowledge the support of The Bryden Centre project (Project ID VA5048), which was awarded by The European Union’s INTERREG VA Programme, managed by the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB), with match funding provided by the Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland and the Department of Business, Enterprise, and Innovation in the Republic of Ireland. Dr. Mahmoud Nasr and Dr. Ahmed I. Osman wish to dedicate this work to the spirit of the distinguished Egyptian professor Dr. Samih A. Halawy, who passed away on the 2nd of September 2022.
Funding
Funding was provided by SEUPB, Bryden Centre project (Project ID VA5048), Ahmed I. Osman
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Osman, A.I., Nasr, M., Farghali, M. et al. Machine learning for membrane design in energy production, gas separation, and water treatment: a review. Environ Chem Lett 22, 505–560 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01695-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01695-y