4.7 Article

Hydrophilic membranes to replace molecular sieves in dewatering the bio-ethanol/water azeotropic mixture

Journal

SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
Volume 136, Issue -, Pages 144-149

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.09.009

Keywords

Bio-ethanol; Ethanol-water azeotrope; Molecular sieve; Membrane dehydration

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 program) [2013CB733600, 2012CB725200, 2011CB710800]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China [21076017]
  3. National High-Tech R&D Program of China (863 Program) [2012AA021404, 2012AA021402, 2014AA021903]
  4. Key Projects in the National Science & Technology Pillar Program during the 12th Five-year Plan Period [2011BAD22804]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bio-ethanol, as a clean and renewable fuel, is gaining increased attention. Biochemically produced by fermentation of an aqueous broth of different feedstock, it is purified by distillation (till the water/ethanol azeotropic mix of similar to 95 wt% ethanol). A further removal of water to obtain >99.5 wt% ethanol is commonly performed using molecular sieves, however with the drawback of a high steam consumption (similar to 0.5 kg steam/kg ethanol). Hydrophilic membranes can be a valid alternative, without steam addition, and with a minimum electrical power required in pumping and in creating the permeate vacuum. The present paper assesses the current molecular sieve operation. It experimentally investigates the separation performance of a commercially available hydrophilic membrane, and finally compares both techniques. The initial experiments demonstrate the high flux obtained and the acceptable selectivity. At a feed temperature of similar to 60 degrees C, a membrane unit of similar to 120 m(2) can replace the current 160 ton molecular sieve unit in a 200,000 ton/year plant. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available