Environmental Impact Improvement of Chitosan‐Based Mixed‐Matrix Membranes Manufacture for CO 2 Gas Separation by Life Cycle Assessment

Abstract The environmental impacts of the manufacture of chitosan (CS) and polymeric poly(1‐trimethylsilyl‐1‐propyne) (PTMSP) mixed‐matrix membranes (MMMs) for CO 2 separation by life cycle assessment (LCA) are compared. An ionic liquid of non‐reported toxicity is used in CS membranes to enhance the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Chemical engineering & technology 2023-10, Vol.46 (10), p.2184-2191
Main Authors: Echarri, Itsaso, Casado-Coterillo, Clara, Rumayor, Marta, Navajas, Alberto, Gandía, Luis M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract The environmental impacts of the manufacture of chitosan (CS) and polymeric poly(1‐trimethylsilyl‐1‐propyne) (PTMSP) mixed‐matrix membranes (MMMs) for CO 2 separation by life cycle assessment (LCA) are compared. An ionic liquid of non‐reported toxicity is used in CS membranes to enhance the mechanical strength, and different fillers are used to increase mechanical and functional properties: ETS‐10, ZIF‐8, HKUST‐1, and Zeolite A. Results with the same CO 2 permeation flux indicate that ETS‐10/IL‐CS is the membrane manufacture with highest impacts due to its lower permeability. When comparing impacts with same permeation areas, the polymeric one is the membrane with highest impacts. Biopolymer and polymer manufacture are the components with highest contribution to the total environmental impacts of each membrane. To decrease all their impacts below fossil polymer membrane for the same CO 2 permeation flux, CS membranes permeabilities should be improved by a numerical factor of 1000, 100, and 2 for the ETS‐10, ZIF‐8, and HKUST‐1/IL‐CS MMMs, respectively.
ISSN:0930-7516
1521-4125
DOI:10.1002/ceat.202200397