MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412988481 · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2025.118490

Assessing process feasibility of salinity gradient systems through maximum extractable and net energy outputs

2025· article· en· W4412988481 on OpenAlex
Khaled Touati, Giti Nouri, Catherine N. Mulligan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of environmental chemical engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMembrane-based Ion Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du QuébecConcordia University
KeywordsProcess (computing)Environmental scienceSalinityEnergy (signal processing)Process engineeringSoil scienceMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsEngineeringEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salinity gradient (SG) has long been considered a promising renewable energy source. Three key technologies, pressure retarded osmosis (PRO), reverse electrodialysis (RED), and nanopore-based power generation (NPG), have been extensively investigated for harnessing SG energy, though their viability remains debated. In this study, to advance the discussion, we derived equations to quantify the maximum extractable energy from PRO, RED, and NPG in module-scale operations under co-current and counter-current modes to estimate the theoretical energy recovery potential of each technology from SG. Results indicate that, under ideal conditions, PRO outperforms RED and NPG in energy efficiency. For real applications, the net energy output (NEO) of SG power plants was assessed using reverse osmosis brine (1.2 M) as the highly concentrated solution and wastewater effluent as the low concentrated solution. Accounting for energy losses, less than 10% of the maximum theoretical recoverable energy is captured as NEO for RED and NPG, while PRO achieves 37%. Furthermore, considering various salinities of highly concentrated solution, a techno-economic analysis was performed to support the theoretical findings. It revealed that the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for RED and NPG remains prohibitively high (LCOE > 0.6 $/kWh) even for hypersaline solutions ( C > 3.5 M). In contrast, PRO demonstrated a more favorable economic outlook, with LCOE approaching competitiveness at 0.26 $/kWh at high salinity. Lastly, pathways to mitigate energy losses and improve process feasibility are proposed to guide future development of economically viable SG energy systems.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it