ArticlePolymers2025
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment for the Fabrication of Polysulfone Membranes Using Slot Die Coating as a Scalable Fabrication Technique.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rice bran wax-hexane superhydrophobic coating production: an environmental assessment.RSC sustainability · 2026Article
- In Situ Fabrication of Bacterial Cellulose-Polyhydroxyalkanoate Composite Membranes from Coconut Water: Mechanical Performance and Life Cycle Assessment.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sensor-Efficient Estimation of Roll Misalignment via Side-to-Side Tension Differences in Roll-to-Roll Polymer Film Processing.Polymers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the emergence of eco-friendly solvents and scalable methods for polymeric membrane fabrication, studies on the impacts of solvent synthesis and manufacturing scale-up have not been conducted. To this end, a life cycle assessment (LCA) was developed with the goal of determining the global environmental and health impacts of producing polysulfone (PSf) membranes with the solvents PolarClean and γ-valerolactone (GVL) via doctor blade extrusion (DBE) and slot die coating (SDC). Along with PolarClean and GVL, dimethylacetamide (DMAc) and N-methyl-2-pyyrolidone (NMP) were included in the LCA as conventional solvents for comparison. The dope solution viscosity had a major influence on the material inventories; to produce a normalized membrane unit on a surface area basis, a larger quantity of PSf-PolarClean-GVL materials was required due to its high viscosity. The life cycle impact assessment found electricity and PolarClean to be major contributing parameters to multiple impact categories during membrane fabrication. The commercial synthesis route of PolarClean selected in this study required hazardous materials derived from petrochemicals, which increased its impact on membrane fabrication. Due to more materials being required to fabricate membranes via SDC to account for tool fluid priming, the PSf-PolarClean-GVL membrane fabricated via SDC exhibited the highest impacts. The amount of electricity and concentration of PolarClean were the most sensitive parameters according to Spearman's rank coefficient analysis. A scenario analysis in which the regional energy grid was substituted found that using the Swedish grid, which comprises far more renewable technologies than the global and US energy grids, significantly lowered impacts in most categories. Despite the reported eco-friendly benefits of using PolarClean and GVL as alternatives to conventional organic solvents, the results in this study provide a wider perspective of membrane fabrication process impacts, highlighting that upstream impacts can counterbalance the beneficial properties of alternative materials.
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.