Comparative Carbon Footprint Analysis of Alumina-Based Multichannel and Hollow Fiber Ceramic Membranes for Microfiltration

This study aims to compare the carbon footprints associated with the fabrication of two types of alumina-based tubular ceramic membranes used in microfiltration (MF): a multichannel membrane produced by extrusion and dip-coating, and an asymmetric hollow fiber membrane fabricated via phase inversion. The multichannel process involves two sintering steps but uses no organic solvents, whereas the phase-inversion method simplifies production through single-step shaping and sintering but requires organic solvents that increase environmental burdens. Using a functional unit of 1 m2 effective membrane area, carbon emissions were quantified from raw material extraction to waste disposal. The results showed total emissions of 8.57 kg CO2-eq/m2 for the multichannel membrane and 10.67 kg CO2-eq/m2 for the hollow fiber membrane. Although the hollow fiber process consumed less energy, its extensive use of solvents, particularly NMP, led to significantly higher emissions. This study provides the first quantitative comparison of these two common ceramic membrane fabrication routes and underscores the importance of considering both energy use and solvent impacts when evaluating the environmental sustainability of membrane production. A sensitivity analysis further evaluated the influence of key parameters, including alumina emission factor, regional electricity carbon intensity, alumina recycling, and solvent substitution or NMP recycling. The analysis demonstrated that each factor could significantly influence the total carbon footprint and, under favorable conditions, narrow or even reverse the gap between the two fabrication routes. This study provides the first quantitative comparison of these two common ceramic membrane fabrication methods and highlights the importance of considering energy use, solvent impacts, and potential mitigation strategies when assessing the environmental sustainability of ceramic membrane production.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Separations
Published
2025-08-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12080220
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Membrane Separation Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.82

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Carbon Footprint Analysis of Alumina-Based Multichannel and Hollow Fiber Ceramic Membranes for Microfiltration

In‐Hyuck Song, Jongman Lee, Jang-Hoon Ha, Hong Joo Lee
1 citations
Separations
Membrane Separation Technologies
0.82
article

Comparative Carbon Footprint Analysis of Alumina-Based Multichannel and Hollow Fiber Ceramic Membranes for Microfiltration

In‐Hyuck Song, Jongman Lee, Jang-Hoon Ha, Hong Joo Lee
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study aims to compare the carbon footprints associated with the fabrication of two types of alumina-based tubular ceramic membranes used in microfiltration (MF): a multichannel membrane produced by extrusion and dip-coating, and an asymmetric hollow fiber membrane fabricated via phase inversion. The multichannel process involves two sintering steps but uses no organic solvents, whereas the phase-inversion method simplifies production through single-step shaping and sintering but requires organic solvents that increase environmental burdens. Using a functional unit of 1 m2 effective membrane area, carbon emissions were quantified from raw material extraction to waste disposal. The results showed total emissions of 8.57 kg CO2-eq/m2 for the multichannel membrane and 10.67 kg CO2-eq/m2 for the hollow fiber membrane. Although the hollow fiber process consumed less energy, its extensive use of solvents, particularly NMP, led to significantly higher emissions. This study provides the first quantitative comparison of these two common ceramic membrane fabrication routes and underscores the importance of considering both energy use and solvent impacts when evaluating the environmental sustainability of membrane production. A sensitivity analysis further evaluated the influence of key parameters, including alumina emission factor, regional electricity carbon intensity, alumina recycling, and solvent substitution or NMP recycling. The analysis demonstrated that each factor could significantly influence the total carbon footprint and, under favorable conditions, narrow or even reverse the gap between the two fabrication routes. This study provides the first quantitative comparison of these two common ceramic membrane fabrication methods and highlights the importance of considering energy use, solvent impacts, and potential mitigation strategies when assessing the environmental sustainability of ceramic membrane production.

SeparationsVol. 12(8)
Korea Institute of Materials Science (KR)
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Korea Institute of Materials Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Membrane Separation Technologies
0.82
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.