ArticleMembranes2022
CO
Article in Membranes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scaling, or inorganic fouling, is a major factor limiting the performance of membrane-based water treatment processes in long-term operation. Over the past few decades, extensive studies have been conducted to control the scale growth found in membrane processes and to develop sustainable and greener processes. This study details the role of CO2 in scale inhibition in membrane processes. The core concept of CO2 utilization is to reduce the influent pH and to minimize the risk of scale formation from magnesium or calcium salts. Three reverse osmosis (RO) units were operated with a control (U1), CO2 (U2), and a commercial antiscalant, MDC-220 (U3). The performances of all the units were compared in terms of change in transmembrane pressure (TMP). The overall efficiency trend was found as U1 > U3 > U2. The membrane surfaces were analyzed using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) for the morphological and elemental compositions, respectively. The surface analysis signified a significant increase in surface smoothness after scale deposition. The noticeable reduction in surface roughness can be described as a result of ionic deposition in the valley region. A sludge-like scale layer was found on the surface of the control membrane (U1) which could not be removed, even after an hour of chemical cleaning. After 20−30 min of cleaning, the U2 membrane was successfully restored to its original state. In brief, this study highlights the sustainable membrane process developed via CO2 utilization for scale inhibition, and the appropriate cleaning approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.