Closed-loop pressure retarded osmosis draw solutions and their regeneration processes: A review

Ali Etemad Zadeh, Khaled Touati, Catherine N. Mulligan, Jeffrey R. McCutcheon and Md. Saifur Rahaman

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2022, vol. 159, issue C

Abstract: Pressure-Retarded Osmosis (PRO) is an osmotic process that has been used to harvest energy from salinity gradients using a semi permeable membrane. A comparison between open-loop PRO (OLPRO) and closed-loop PRO (CLPRO) was made regarding their performance and costs. In CLPRO, where the diluted draw solution is re-concentrated in the regeneration system to be reutilized in the process, has recently received an intensive focus as the most viable configuration for a standalone power plant. The choice of the PRO draw solution in CLPRO is crucial to garner a high osmotic pressure as the key for the feasibility of the process. In this review, the draw solutions are critically evaluated in the literature in terms of energy output as well as the method of regeneration used to recirculate them. A set of practical criteria has been suggested to appraise the adequacy of the solution for CLPRO application. It was concluded that NH3−CO2 theoretically can produce 170 W/m2 of power density. Inorganic draw solutes such as NaCl can generate high power density up to 87 W/m2. Organic draw solutes with their remarkably low reverse salt flux (RSF) have promising potential for future application in PRO. Similarly, the regeneration systems of the diluted draw solutions have also been reviewed and discussed. How the energy consumption of the regeneration process affects the feasibility of CLPRO is explained. For the specific case of osmotic heat engines (OHEs), when the energy of the regeneration process is supplied by heat waste, the range of applicability of the heat waste in CLPRO in terms of efficiency is defined and compared to Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC). The results showed that CLPRO has better efficiency than ORC for temperatures T < 80 °C, which makes it a promising process or low-grade heat energy recovery. In addition, a PRO-RO hybrid system coupled with solar power can reduce the net specific energy consumption (SEC) to 0.39 kWh/m3. The conditions that regeneration processes should operate under to make PRO viable are discussed in the last section. Overall, the study indicates the key factors for optimizing the performance of CLPRO process.

Keywords: Closed-loop PRO; Draw solution; Regeneration process; Specific energy; Cost effectiveness (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122001150
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:rensus:v:159:y:2022:i:c:s1364032122001150

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic
http://www.elsevier. ... 600126/bibliographic

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112191

Access Statistics for this article

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is currently edited by L. Kazmerski

More articles in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().