Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31500149›Full record

ArticleMembranes2019

Pilot-Scale Assessment of Urea as a Chemical Cleaning Agent for Biofouling Control in Spiral-Wound Reverse Osmosis Membrane Elements.

Huma Sanawar, Szilárd S Bucs, Martin A Pot, Jure Zlopasa, Nadia M Farhat, Geert-Jan Witkamp, Joop C Kruithof, Mark C M van Loosdrecht, Johannes S Vrouwenvelder

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Membranes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Huma SanawarKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia. huma.sanawar@kaust.edu.sa.
Szilárd S BucsKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
Martin A PotEvides Industriewater BV, Process & Technology Department, P.O. Box 4472, 3006 AL Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jure ZlopasaDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629 HZ Delft, The Netherlands.
Nadia M FarhatKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-3566-6163
Geert-Jan WitkampKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
Joop C KruithofWetsus, European Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Technology, Oostergoweg 9, 8911 MA Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Mark C M van LoosdrechtDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629 HZ Delft, The Netherlands.
Johannes S VrouwenvelderKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia. johannes.vrouwenvelder@kaust.edu.sa.
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology · SADelft University of Technology · NLEvides (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

King Abdullah University of Science and Technology BAS/1/1024-01-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Routine chemical cleaning with the combined use of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and hydrochloric acid (HCl) is carried out as a means of biofouling control in reverse osmosis (RO) membranes. The novelty of the research presented herein is in the application of urea, instead of NaOH, as a chemical cleaning agent to full-scale spiral-wound RO membrane elements. A comparative study was carried out at a pilot-scale facility at the Evides Industriewater DECO water treatment plant in the Netherlands. Three fouled 8-inch diameter membrane modules were harvested from the lead position of one of the full-scale RO units treating membrane bioreactor (MBR) permeate. One membrane module was not cleaned and was assessed as the control. The second membrane module was cleaned by the standard alkali/acid cleaning protocol. The third membrane module was cleaned with concentrated urea solution followed by acid rinse. The results showed that urea cleaning is as effective as the conventional chemical cleaning with regards to restoring the normalized feed channel pressure drop, and more effective in terms of (i) improving membrane permeability, and (ii) solubilizing organic foulants and the subsequent removal of the surface fouling layer. Higher biomass removal by urea cleaning was also indicated by the fact that the total organic carbon (TOC) content in the HCl rinse solution post-urea-cleaning was an order of magnitude greater than in the HCl rinse after standard cleaning. Further optimization of urea-based membrane cleaning protocols and urea recovery and/or waste treatment methods is proposed for full-scale applications.

Indexed as

biofoulingchemical cleaningdesalinationmembrane autopsynanofiltrationurea

Identifiers

PMID31500149
PMCPMC6780893
OpenAlexW2971732059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.