Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of energy consumption in desalination by capacitive deionization and reverse osmosis

Open access
Qin, Mohan, Deshmukh, Akshay, Epsztein, Razi, Patel, Sohum K., Owoseni, Oluwaseye M., Walker, W. Shane, Elimelech, Menachem·2019·Desalination

Abstract

Abstract Capacitive deionization (CDI), which is based on the electrosorption of ions by porous electrodes, is an emerging technology for brackish water desalination. Understanding the key drivers of energy consumption in CDI and benchmarking CDI with reverse osmosis (RO), the current state-of-the-art for brackish and seawater desalination, is crucial to guide the future development of desalination technologies. In this study, we develop system-scale models to analyze the energy consumption and energy efficiency of CDI and RO over a wide range of material properties and operating conditions. Using our models, we explore how the energetic performance of CDI and RO compare as a function of feed salinity, water recovery, salt rejection, and average water flux, which is normalized by electrode and membrane area in CDI and RO, respectively. Our analysis shows that RO is significantly more energy efficient than CDI, particularly when targeting higher salinity feed streams and higher salt rejection values. For brackish water with a salt concentration of 2000 mg L−1, achieving 50% water recovery and 75% salt rejection, with an average water flux of 10 L m−2 h−1 using CDI requires a specific energy consumption of 0.85 kWh m−3, more than eight times that of RO (0.09 kWh m−3). Importantly, our results also indicate that current efforts to improve electrode materials can only marginally reduce the energy consumption of CDI. We conclude with a discussion highlighting other important factors, such as capital cost, electrode stability, and membrane fouling, which affect the efficacy of CDI and RO for low-salinity desalination.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.desal.2019.01.003

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 100 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Qin, M., Deshmukh, A., Epsztein, R., Patel, S. K., Owoseni, O. M., Walker, W. S., & Elimelech, M.
Venue
Desalination
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
455
Pages
100-114
ISSN
0011-9164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2908577003
Cited by
292
References
100
FWCI
15.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of energy consumption in desalination by capacitive deionization and reverse osmosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.desal.2019.01.003
The paper
Qin, M., Deshmukh, A., Epsztein, R., Patel, S. K., Owoseni, O. M., Walker, W. S., & Elimelech, M. (2019). Comparison of energy consumption in desalination by capacitive deionization and reverse osmosis. Desalination. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.01.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.