In the quest for ionic liquid entrainers for the recovery of R-32 and R-125 by extractive distillation under rate-based considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In line with the reduction targets imposed on the production of high global warming potential (GWP) hydrofluorocarbons by the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, the recovery of refrigeration fluids at the end of life of refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment and the selective separation of the most valuable refrigerants is sought for recycling purposes and climate change mitigation. To that end, extractive distillation (ED) processes using ionic liquids (ILs) as entrainers is considered a promising technology to solve the difficulty of separating the typical close boiling or azeotropic behaviour of fluorinated hydrocarbon mixtures. This work provides insight into the design of ED processes evaluating the influence of both mass transfer phenomena (rate-based models) and IL properties (absorption capacity, solubility selectivity and viscosity) on the critical process variables (e.g., solvent-to-feed ratio, reboiler temperature, packing height) to separate the components of the binary mixture R-410A (50 wt % difluoromethane (R-32) + 50 wt % pentafluoroethane (R-125)) with minimum energy consumption and purity >99.5 wt % of the two products. Results point to the solubility selectivity as the most influential IL property, and to [C2C1im][SCN], among all ILs assessed, as a promising entrainer because of its high R-32/R–125 solubility selectivity and low viscosity, which enables to operate the ED process at lower temperatures. The recovered R-32 can be used as a greener alternative to the high-GWP R-410A, as well as a main component in the formulation of new low-GWP mixtures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".