Membranes 2025, 15(12), 367; https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes15120367 (registering DOI) - 1 Dec 2025
Abstract
A techno-economic and environmental evaluation of dehydrating five industrially relevant solvents (isopropanol, acetonitrile, tetrahydrofuran, acetic acid, and n-methyl-2-pyrrolidone) using pervaporation-based processes was performed and compared to their respective traditional distillation processes. A standalone pervaporation and two hybrid processes (i.e., distillation-pervaporation and distillation-pervaporation-distillation) employing
[...] Read more.
A techno-economic and environmental evaluation of dehydrating five industrially relevant solvents (isopropanol, acetonitrile, tetrahydrofuran, acetic acid, and n-methyl-2-pyrrolidone) using pervaporation-based processes was performed and compared to their respective traditional distillation processes. A standalone pervaporation and two hybrid processes (i.e., distillation-pervaporation and distillation-pervaporation-distillation) employing HybSi® AR membranes were simulated in Aspen Plus, where the pervaporation module was modeled as a separator block that followed the experimental data. The experiments were performed at a vacuum pressure of 20 mbar and a temperature of 130 °C. The performance was compared based on several technical, economic, and environmental measures, of which key metrics are the levelized cost of separation (LCOS) and CO2 footprint reduction. From the economic perspective, the pervaporation-based processes are much more economical than the distillation processes for isopropanol (up to 42% reduction in LCOS) and acetonitrile (up to 39% reduction in LCOS), while their economic performance is similar to the benchmark process in the case of tetrahydrofuran (only up to 4% reduction in LCOS). For acetic acid (9% higher LCOS) and n-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (124% higher LCOS), the pervaporation-based processes do not perform better than the distillation processes under the current technical and economic considerations. However, a sensitivity analysis showed the potential to make the pervaporation-based processes more economical by improving the permeate flux and membrane module cost. On the other hand, the pervaporation-based processes are much more environmentally friendly for all the solvents studied compared to their respective benchmark processes. The reduction in CO2 footprint is in the order of 86%, 82%, 73%, 82%, and 65%, respectively, for the aforementioned solvents.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Advances in Oil & Gas, Mining, and Environmental Technologies: Innovations in Membrane and Porous Material Technologies)
►
Show Figures
Figure 1
