Removal and recovery of boron from geothermal wastewater by selective ion exchange resins. I. Laboratory tests

Kabay, Nalan; Yilmaz, İdil; Yamaç, Sündüz; Samatya, Saba; Yüksel, Mümine; Yüksel, Ümran; Arda, Müşerref; Sağlam, Mehmet; Iwanaga, Tatsuto; Hirowatari, Kazuo

doi:10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2004.02.020

Cited by 113 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ion-exchange process in which N-methyl glucamine type resins such as Amberlite XE 243, Amberlite JRN-78, Amberlite IRA743, Diaion CRB01, Diaion CRB02, Wofatit MK51 and Purolite S108 have been used is the most extensively studied and reported in the literature [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. As the most efficient method, ion-exchange process can even remove boron to levels of <50 g/L, far below the required limits [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boron removal from aqueous solution by direct contact membrane distillation

Hou

Wang

Sun

et al. 2010

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boron removal from aqueous solution by direct contact membrane distillation

Hou

Wang

Sun

et al. 2010

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There are also some other boron removal methods but ion exchange process is the most extensively used with some commercial boron selective resins, such as Amberlite XE 243 [9,11,12], the macroreticular resin Amberlite IRA743 [13,14] and some other N-methylglucamine type chelating resins, Diaion CRB-01, Diaion CRB 02 and Purolite S 108 [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When the average level of boron in irrigation waters (generally given as 1 mg l −1 ) is considered, the very high level of boron in the disposed water of Kızıldere makes the use of this water for irrigation purposes impossible. For the investigation of boron removal from Kızıldere geothermal wastewater, Amberlite IRA 743 [14], Diaion CRB 01, Diaion CRB 02, and Purolite S 108 [15] were employed. These resins have common in N-methylglucamine functional group and they just differ in the type of polymer chain and in some of their physical characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis, characterization and application of a novel sorbent, glucamine-modified MCM-41, for the removal/preconcentration of boron from waters

Kaftan

Açıkel

Eroğlu

et al. 2005

Analytica Chimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel sorbent was prepared by the functionalization of an inorganic support material, MCM-41, with N-methylglucamine for the uptake of boron from aqueous solutions prior to its determination by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). Characterization of the newly synthesized material was performed using BET, XRD, TEM, SEM and DRIFTS techniques, in addition to its C and N elemental content. Sorption behavior of the novel sorbent for boron was also investigated and found to obey Freundlich and Dubinin-Radushkevich (D-R) isotherm models. The maximum amount of B (as H 3 BO 3 ) that can be sorbed by the sorbent was calculated from the D-R isotherm and was found to be 0.8 mmol B g −1 of sorbent. The applicability of the new sorbent for the removal/preconcentration of boron from aqueous samples was examined by batch method. It was found that the sorbent can take up 85% of boron in 5 min whereas quantitative sorption is obtained in 30 min. Any pH greater than 6 can be used for sorption. Desorption from the sorbent was carried out using 1.0 M HNO 3 . The sorption efficiency of the new sorbent was also compared to that of Amberlite IRA 743, a commercial resin with N-methylglucamine functional groups. Within the experimental conditions employed, the new sorbent was found to have higher sorption efficiency than the commercial resin. For method validation, spike recovery tests were performed at various concentration levels in different water types and were found to be between 83-95 and 75-92% for ultra pure water and geothermal water, respectively.

show abstract

“…Even where its salinity is low, this water may exhibit elevated contents of undesirable elements such as boron, arsenic and fl uorine, which signifi cantly restricts the possibility of discharging it into surface waters. For this reason the desalination of geothermal waters is being considered in many parts of the world, in arid areas, mainly for irrigation purposes, to reduce the negative impacts of saline geothermal waters discharged to water bodies and surrounding agricultural areas and also as a possible solution leading to the decentralisation of the drinking water supply [5][6]18]. Research aimed at assessing the feasibility of using treated geothermal water for drinking purposes has also been undertaken in Poland.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of a Hybrid Uf-Ro Process to Geothermal Water Desalination. Concentrate Disposal and Cost Analysis

Tomaszewska¹,

Pająk²,

Bodzek³

2014

Archives of Environmental Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

M embrane-based water desalination processes and hybrid technologies are often considered as a technologically and economically viable alternative for desalination of geothermal waters. This has been confi rmed by the results of pilot studies concerning the UF-RO desalination of geothermal waters extracted from various geological structures in Poland. The assessment of the feasibility of implementing the water desalination process analysed on an industrial scale is largely dependent on the method and possibility of disposing or utilising the concentrate. The analyses conducted in this respect have demonstrated that it is possible to use the solution obtained as a balneological product owing to its elevated metasilicic acid, fl uorides and iodides ions content. Due to environmental considerations, injecting the concentrate back into the formation is the preferable solution. The energy effi ciency and economic analysis conducted demonstrated that the cost effectiveness of implementing the UF-RO process in a geothermal system on an industrial scale largely depends on the factors related to its operation, including without limitation the amount of geothermal water extracted, water salinity, the absorption parameters of the wells used to inject water back into the formation, the scale of problems related to the disposal of cooled water, local demand for drinking and household water, etc. The decrease in the pressure required to inject water into the formation as well as the reduction in the stream of the water injected are among the key cost-effectiveness factors. Ensuring favourable desalinated water sale terms (price/quantity) is also a very important consideration owing to the electrical power required to conduct the UF-RO process.

show abstract

Removal and recovery of boron from geothermal wastewater by selective ion exchange resins. I. Laboratory tests

Cited by 113 publications

References 17 publications

Boron removal from aqueous solution by direct contact membrane distillation

Boron removal from aqueous solution by direct contact membrane distillation

Synthesis, characterization and application of a novel sorbent, glucamine-modified MCM-41, for the removal/preconcentration of boron from waters

Application of a Hybrid Uf-Ro Process to Geothermal Water Desalination. Concentrate Disposal and Cost Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About