No abstract

Electrodialysis (ED) desalination performance of different conventional and laboratory-scale ion exchange membranes (IEMs) has been evaluated by many researchers, but most of these studies used their own sets of experimental parameters such as feed solution compositions and concentrations, superficial velocities of the process streams (diluate, concentrate, and electrode rinse), applied electrical voltages, and types of IEMs. Thus, direct comparison of ED desalination performance of different IEMs is virtually impossible. While the use of different conventional IEMs in ED has been reported, the use of bioinspired ion exchange membrane has not been reported yet. The goal of this study was to evaluate the ED desalination performance differences between novel laboratory‑scale bioinspired IEM and conventional IEMs by determining (i) limiting current density, (ii) current density, (iii) current efficiency, (iv) salinity reduction in diluate stream, (v) normalized specific energy consumption, and (vi) water flux by osmosis as a function of (a) initial concentration of NaCl feed solution (diluate and concentrate streams), (b) superficial velocity of feed solution, and (c) applied stack voltage per cell-pair of membranes. A laboratory‑scale single stage batch-recycle electrodialysis experimental apparatus was assembled with five cell‑pairs of IEMs with an active cross-sectional area of 7.84 cm2. In this study, seven combinations of IEMs (commercial and laboratory-made) were compared: (i) Neosepta AMX/CMX, (ii) PCA PCSA/PCSK, (iii) Fujifilm Type 1 AEM/CEM, (iv) SUEZ AR204SZRA/CR67HMR, (v) Ralex AMH-PES/CMH-PES, (vi) Neosepta AMX/Bare Polycarbonate membrane (Polycarb), and (vii) Neosepta AMX/Sandia novel bioinspired cation exchange membrane (SandiaCEM). ED desalination performance with the Sandia novel bioinspired cation exchange membrane (SandiaCEM) was found to be competitive with commercial Neosepta CMX cation exchange membrane.