CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 188

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Nanofiltration membrane processes for water recycling, reuse and product recovery within various industries: A review

Ahmad, Nor Naimah Rosyadah, Ang, Wei Lun, Teow, Yeit Haan, Mohammad, Abdul Wahab, Hilal, Nidal·2022·Journal of Water Process Engineering
DOI 10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102478
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102478

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 123

  1. Maryam, 2019, Wastewater reclamation and reuse trends in Turkey: opportunities and challenges, J. Water Process Eng., 30, 10.1016/j.jwpe.2017.10.001 · DOI
  2. Yang, 2020, Membrane-based processes used in municipal wastewater treatment for water reuse: state-of-the-art and performance analysis, Membranes, 10, 131, 10.3390/membranes10060131 · DOI
  3. Zolghadr, 2021, The role of membrane-based technologies in environmental treatment and reuse of produced water, Front. Environ. Sci., 9, 71, 10.3389/fenvs.2021.629767 · DOI
  4. Wang, 2019, Sustainability of dairy and soy processing: a review on wastewater recycling, J. Clean. Prod., 237, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117821 · DOI
  5. Naidu, 2019, A critical review on remediation, reuse, and resource recovery from acid mine drainage, Environ. Pollut., 247, 1110, 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.01.085 · DOI
  6. Luo, 2013, Effects of pH and salt on nanofiltration—a critical review, J. Membr. Sci., 438, 18, 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.03.029 · DOI
  7. Mohammad, 2015, Nanofiltration membranes review: recent advances and future prospects, Desalination, 356, 226, 10.1016/j.desal.2014.10.043 · DOI
  8. Paul, 2016, Chemistry and fabrication of polymeric nanofiltration membranes: a review, Polymer, 103, 417, 10.1016/j.polymer.2016.07.085 · DOI
  9. Yang, 2019, A review on reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes for water purification, Polymers, 11, 1252, 10.3390/polym11081252 · DOI
  10. Wang, 2020, A review of advances in EDCs and PhACs removal by nanofiltration: mechanisms, impact factors and the influence of organic matter, Chem. Eng. J., 406, 126722, 10.1016/j.cej.2020.126722 · DOI
  11. Guo, 2021, Loose nanofiltration membrane custom-tailored for resource recovery, Chem. Eng. J., 409, 10.1016/j.cej.2020.127376 · DOI
  12. Arumugham, 2021, Recent developments in porous ceramic membranes for wastewater treatment and desalination: a review, J. Environ. Manag., 293, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112925 · DOI
  13. Samaei, 2018, The application of pressure-driven ceramic membrane technology for the treatment of industrial wastewaters–a review, Sep. Purif. Technol., 200, 198, 10.1016/j.seppur.2018.02.041 · DOI
  14. Buscio, 2016, Reuse of textile dyeing effluents treated with coupled nanofiltration and electrochemical processes, Materials, 9, 490, 10.3390/ma9060490 · DOI
  15. Dasgupta, 2015, Nanofiltration based water reclamation from tannery effluent following coagulation pretreatment, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 121, 22, 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.07.006 · DOI
  16. Esteves, 2020, A study on lupin beans process wastewater nanofiltration treatment and lupanine recovery, J. Clean. Prod., 277, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123349 · DOI
  17. Chang, 2019, An integrated coagulation-ultrafiltration-nanofiltration process for internal reuse of shale gas flowback and produced water, Sep. Purif. Technol., 211, 310, 10.1016/j.seppur.2018.09.081 · DOI
  18. Ağtaş, 2021, Pilot-scale ceramic ultrafiltration/nanofiltration membrane system application for caustic recovery and reuse in textile sector, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 28, 41029, 10.1007/s11356-021-13588-0 · DOI
  19. Epsztein, 2018, Ionic charge density-dependent Donnan exclusion in nanofiltration of monovalent anions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 52, 4108, 10.1021/acs.est.7b06400 · DOI
  20. Almazán, 2015, Nanofiltration of glucose: analysis of parameters and membrane characterization, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 94, 485, 10.1016/j.cherd.2014.09.005 · DOI
  21. Bowen, 2002, Modelling the performance of membrane nanofiltration—critical assessment and model development, Chem. Eng. Sci., 57, 1121, 10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00413-4 · DOI
  22. Oatley-Radcliffe, 2014, Critical appraisal of current nanofiltration modelling strategies for seawater desalination and further insights on dielectric exclusion, Desalination, 343, 154, 10.1016/j.desal.2013.10.001 · DOI
  23. Bowen, 1997, Characterisation of nanofiltration membranes for predictive purposes—use of salts, uncharged solutes and atomic force microscopy, J. Membr. Sci., 126, 91, 10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00276-1 · DOI
  24. Cleveland, 2002, Standardized membrane pore size characterization by polyethylene glycol rejection, J. Environ. Eng., 128, 399, 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2002)128:5(399) · DOI
  25. Nghiem, 2004, Removal of natural hormones by nanofiltration membranes: measurement, modeling, and mechanisms, Environ. Sci. Technol., 38, 1888, 10.1021/es034952r · DOI
  26. López-Muñoz, 2009, Influence of membrane, solute and solution properties on the retention of phenolic compounds in aqueous solution by nanofiltration membranes, Sep. Purif. Technol., 66, 194, 10.1016/j.seppur.2008.11.001 · DOI
  27. Oatley, 2013, Investigation of the dielectric properties of nanofiltration membranes, Desalination, 315, 100, 10.1016/j.desal.2012.09.013 · DOI
  28. Zhu, 2019, The effect of dielectric exclusion on the rejection performance of inhomogeneously charged polyamide nanofiltration membranes, J. Nanopart. Res., 21, 1, 10.1007/s11051-019-4665-4 · DOI
  29. Yaqub, 2019, Zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) technology for resource recovery from wastewater: a review, Sci. Total Environ., 681, 551, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.062 · DOI
  30. Ranganathan, 2007, Recycling of wastewaters of textile dyeing industries using advanced treatment technology and cost analysis—case studies, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 50, 306, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.06.004 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Samsami, 2020, Recent advances in the treatment of dye-containing wastewater from textile industries: overview and perspectives, Process Saf. Environ. Prot., 143, 138, 10.1016/j.psep.2020.05.034 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Thamaraiselvan, 2015, Membrane processes for dye wastewater treatment: recent progress in fouling control, Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 1007, 10.1080/10643389.2014.900242 · DOI
  33. Chu, 2020, Improving pressure durability and fractionation property via reinforced PES loose nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes for textile wastewater treatment, J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng., 108, 71, 10.1016/j.jtice.2019.12.009 · DOI
  34. Ong, 2014, Nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes for textile wastewater treatment: lab-scale and pilot-scale studies, Chem. Eng. Sci., 114, 51, 10.1016/j.ces.2014.04.007 · DOI
  35. Tavangar, 2019, Toward real textile wastewater treatment: membrane fouling control and effective fractionation of dyes/inorganic salts using a hybrid electrocoagulation–nanofiltration process, Sep. Purif. Technol., 216, 115, 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.01.070 · DOI
  36. Ji, 2019, Preparation of high-flux PSF/GO loose nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes with dense-loose structure for treating textile wastewater, Chem. Eng. J., 363, 33, 10.1016/j.cej.2019.01.111 · DOI
  37. Salahshoor, 2021, Magnetic field–influenced nanofiltration membrane blended by CS–EDTA–mGO as multi–functionality green modifier to enhance nanofiltration performance, efficient removal of Na2SO4/Pb2+/RR195 and cyclic wastewater treatment, Chemosphere, 278, 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130379 · DOI
  38. Ahmad, 2021, Current advances in membrane technologies for saline wastewater treatment: a comprehensive review, Desalination, 517, 10.1016/j.desal.2021.115170 · DOI
  39. Mi, 2020, Development of antifouling nanofiltration membrane with zwitterionic functionalized monomer for efficient dye/salt selective separation, J. Membr. Sci., 601, 10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117795 · DOI
  40. Chidambaram, 2015, Fouling of nanofiltration membranes by dyes during brine recovery from textile dye bath wastewater, Chem. Eng. J., 262, 156, 10.1016/j.cej.2014.09.062 · DOI
  41. Ang, 2015, A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and desalination plants, Desalination, 363, 2, 10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008 · DOI
  42. Cinperi, 2019, Treatment of woolen textile wastewater using membrane bioreactor, nanofiltration and reverse osmosis for reuse in production processes, J. Clean. Prod., 223, 837, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.166 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Lebron, 2021, Integrated photo-Fenton and membrane-based techniques for textile effluent reclamation, Sep. Purif. Technol., 272, 10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118932 · DOI
  44. Barredo-Damas, 2010, Ceramic membrane behavior in textile wastewater ultrafiltration, Desalination, 250, 623, 10.1016/j.desal.2009.09.037 · DOI
  45. Schlesinger, 2006, Evaluation of alkali resistant nanofiltration membranes for the separation of hemicellulose from concentrated alkaline process liquors, Desalination, 192, 303, 10.1016/j.desal.2005.05.031 · DOI
  46. Liao, 2021, Regulating composition and structure of nanofillers in thin film nanocomposite (TFN) membranes for enhanced separation performance: a critical review, Sep. Purif. Technol., 266, 10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118567 · DOI
  47. Seah, 2022, Greener synthesis of functionalized-GO incorporated TFN NF membrane for potential recovery of saline water from salt/dye mixed solution, Desalination, 523, 10.1016/j.desal.2021.115403 · DOI
  48. Hu, 2021, Polymer brush-modified graphene oxide membrane with excellent structural stability for effective fractionation of textile wastewater, J. Membr. Sci., 618, 10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118698 · DOI
  49. Zhang, 2017, Loose nanofiltration membrane for dye/salt separation through interfacial polymerization with in-situ generated TiO2 nanoparticles, Appl. Surf. Sci., 410, 494, 10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.03.087 · DOI
  50. Yang, 2022, High performance nanocomposite nanofiltration membranes with polydopamine-modified cellulose nanocrystals for efficient dye/salt separation, Desalination, 521, 10.1016/j.desal.2021.115385 · DOI
  51. Couto, 2017, Coupling of nanofiltration with microfiltration and membrane bioreactor for textile effluent reclamation, Sep. Sci. Technol., 52, 2150, 10.1080/01496395.2017.1321670 · DOI
  52. Li, 2020, Influence of nanofiltration concentrate recirculation on performance and economic feasibility of a pilot-scale membrane bioreactor-nanofiltration hybrid process for textile wastewater treatment with high water recovery, J. Clean. Prod., 261, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121067 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Andrade, 2014, Nanofiltration as tertiary treatment for the reuse of dairy wastewater treated by membrane bioreactor, Sep. Purif. Technol., 126, 21, 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.01.056 · DOI
  54. Zhang, 2017, Citric acid production by recycling its wastewater treated with anaerobic digestion and nanofiltration, Process Biochem., 58, 245, 10.1016/j.procbio.2017.04.022 · DOI
  55. Ochando-Pulido, 2015, Physicochemical analysis and adequation of olive oil mill wastewater after advanced oxidation process for reclamation by pressure-driven membrane technology, Sci. Total Environ., 503, 113, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.109 · DOI
  56. Ochando-Pulido, 2020, Optimization of polymeric nanofiltration performance for olive-oil-washing wastewater phenols recovery and reclamation, Sep. Purif. Technol., 236, 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.116261 · DOI
  57. Sánchez-Arévalo, 2021, Effect of the operating conditions on a nanofiltration process to separate low-molecular-weight phenolic compounds from the sugars present in olive mill wastewaters, Process Saf. Environ. Prot., 148, 428, 10.1016/j.psep.2020.10.002 · DOI
  58. Ochando-Pulido, 2018, About two-phase olive oil washing wastewater simultaneous phenols recovery and treatment by nanofiltration, Process Saf. Environ. Prot., 114, 159, 10.1016/j.psep.2017.12.005 · DOI
  59. Chen, 2016, Fully recycling dairy wastewater by an integrated isoelectric precipitation–nanofiltration–anaerobic fermentation process, Chem. Eng. J., 283, 476, 10.1016/j.cej.2015.07.086 · DOI
  60. Chen, 2017, A novel membrane-based integrated process for fractionation and reclamation of dairy wastewater, Chem. Eng. J., 313, 1061, 10.1016/j.cej.2016.10.134 · DOI
  61. Abdullah, 2018, Performance of nanofiltration-like forward-osmosis membranes for aerobically treated palm oil mill effluent, Chem. Eng. Technol., 41, 303, 10.1002/ceat.201700339 · DOI
  62. Ghani, 2018, Fouling assessment of tertiary palm oil mill effluent (POME) membrane treatment for water reclamation, J. Water Reuse Desalin., 8, 412, 10.2166/wrd.2017.198 · DOI
  63. Zangeneh, 2021, Evaluation of dynamic behavior of hydrophilic and photocatalytic self-cleaning PES nanofiltration membrane post treating biologically treated palm oil mill effluent (POME), Chem. Eng. Process.Process Intensif., 169, 10.1016/j.cep.2021.108635 · DOI
  64. Naidua, 2021, Utilization of moringa oleifera and nanofiltration membrane to treat palm oil mill effluent (POME), Materials Sci. Eng. Technol., 52, 346
  65. Teow, 2018, Fouling behaviours of two stages microalgae/membrane filtration system applied to palm oil mill effluent treatment, Membr. Water Treat., 9, 373
  66. Abdullah, 2018, Performance evaluation of hybrid coagulation/nanofiltration process for AT-POME treatment, Int. J. Eng., 31, 1430
  67. Ahmad, 2003, Water recycling from palm oil mill effluent (POME) using membrane technology, Desalination, 157, 87, 10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00387-4 · DOI
  68. Al-Ghouti, 2019, Produced water characteristics, treatment and reuse: a review, Journal of Water Process Engineering, 28, 222, 10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.02.001 · DOI · Paper page
  69. Alzahrani, 2013, Identification of foulants, fouling mechanisms and cleaning efficiency for NF and RO treatment of produced water, Sep. Purif. Technol., 118, 324, 10.1016/j.seppur.2013.07.016 · DOI
  70. Alzahrani, 2014, Challenges and trends in membrane technology implementation for produced water treatment: a review, J. WaterProcess. Eng., 4, 107
  71. Alva-Argáez, 2007, The design of water-using systems in petroleum refining using a water-pinch decomposition, Chem. Eng. J., 128, 33, 10.1016/j.cej.2006.10.001 · DOI
  72. Gamal Khedr, 2015, Nanofiltration of oil field-produced water for reinjection and optimum protection of oil formation, Desalin. Water Treat., 55, 3460, 10.1080/19443994.2014.939497 · DOI
  73. Gregory, 2011, Water management challenges associated with the production of shale gas by hydraulic fracturing, Elements, 7, 181, 10.2113/gselements.7.3.181 · DOI
  74. Carrero-Parreño, 2017, Optimal pretreatment system of flowback water from shale gas production, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 56, 4386, 10.1021/acs.iecr.6b04016 · DOI
  75. Riley, 2016, Hybrid membrane bio-systems for sustainable treatment of oil and gas produced water and fracturing flowback water, Sep. Purif. Technol., 171, 297, 10.1016/j.seppur.2016.07.008 · DOI
  76. Riley, 2018, Closed circuit desalination of O&G produced water: An evaluation of NF/RO performance and integrity, Desalination, 442, 51, 10.1016/j.desal.2018.05.004 · DOI
  77. Seip, 2021, Lithium recovery from hydraulic fracturing flowback and produced water using a selective ion exchange sorbent, Chem. Eng. J., 426, 10.1016/j.cej.2021.130713 · DOI
  78. Moser, 2018, Effect of MBR-H2O2/UV Hybrid pre-treatment on nanofiltration performance for the treatment of petroleum refinery wastewater, Sep. Purif. Technol., 192, 176, 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.09.070 · DOI
  79. Santos, 2016, Oil refinery hazardous effluents minimization by membrane filtration: an on-site pilot plant study, J. Environ. Manag., 181, 762, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.027 · DOI
  80. Akcil, 2006, Acid Mine Drainage (AMD): causes, treatment and case studies, J. Clean. Prod., 14, 1139, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.09.006 · DOI
  81. Wadekar, 2017, Laboratory and pilot-scale nanofiltration treatment of abandoned mine drainage for the recovery of products suitable for industrial reuse, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 56, 7355, 10.1021/acs.iecr.7b01329 · DOI
  82. Simate, 2014, Acid mine drainage: challenges and opportunities, J. Environ.Chem. Eng., 2, 1785, 10.1016/j.jece.2014.07.021 · DOI
  83. Santomartino, 2007, Estimating the longevity of limestone drains in treating acid mine drainage containing high concentrations of iron, Appl. Geochem., 22, 2344, 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2007.04.020 · DOI
  84. Mullett, 2014, Nanofiltration of mine water: impact of feed pH and membrane charge on resource recovery and water discharge, Membranes, 4, 163, 10.3390/membranes4020163 · DOI
  85. Ricci, 2015, Integration of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis for metal separation and sulfuric acid recovery from gold mining effluent, Sep. Purif. Technol., 154, 11, 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.08.040 · DOI
  86. Ricci, 2017, Assessment of the chemical stability of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes employed in treatment of acid gold mining effluent, Sep. Purif. Technol., 174, 301, 10.1016/j.seppur.2016.11.007 · DOI
  87. Reis, 2018, Comparison of nanofiltration and direct contact membrane distillation as an alternative for gold mining effluent reclamation, Chem. Eng. Process.Process Intensif., 133, 24, 10.1016/j.cep.2018.08.020 · DOI
  88. Ramos, 2020, Membrane selection for the Gold mining pressure-oxidation process (POX) effluent reclamation using integrated UF-NF-RO processes, J. Environ. Chem. Eng., 8, 10.1016/j.jece.2020.104056 · DOI
  89. Amaral, 2018, Integrated UF–NF–RO route for gold mining effluent treatment: from bench-scale to pilot-scale, Desalination, 440, 111, 10.1016/j.desal.2018.02.030 · DOI
  90. Andrade, 2017, Nanofiltration and reverse osmosis applied to gold mining effluent treatment and reuse, Braz. J. Chem. Eng., 34, 93, 10.1590/0104-6632.20170341s20150082 · DOI
  91. He, 2016, Co-treatment of abandoned mine drainage and Marcellus Shale flowback water for use in hydraulic fracturing, Water Res., 104, 425, 10.1016/j.watres.2016.08.030 · DOI
  92. Pal, 2020, Recycling of wastewater from tannery industry through membrane-integrated hybrid treatment using a novel graphene oxide nanocomposite, J. Water Process Eng., 36, 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101324 · DOI
  93. Dixit, 2015, Toxic hazards of leather industry and technologies to combat threat: a review, J. Clean. Prod., 87, 39, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.017 · DOI
  94. Chakraborty, 2014, Experimental analysis, modeling and optimization of chromium (VI) removal from aqueous solutions by polymer-enhanced ultrafiltration, J. Membr. Sci., 456, 139, 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.01.016 · DOI
  95. Romero-Dondiz, 2016, Comparison of the performance of ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes for recovery and recycle of tannins in the leather industry, J. Clean. Prod., 135, 71, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.096 · DOI
  96. Galiana-Aleixandre, 2011, Reducing sulfates concentration in the tannery effluent by applying pollution prevention techniques and nanofiltration, J. Clean. Prod., 19, 91, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.09.006 · DOI
  97. Religa, 2011, Effect of membrane properties on chromium (III) recirculation from concentrate salt mixture solution by nanofiltration, Desalination, 274, 164, 10.1016/j.desal.2011.02.006 · DOI
  98. Gando-Ferreira, 2015, Integration of ion-exchange and nanofiltration processes for recovering Cr (III) salts from synthetic tannery wastewater, Environ. Technol., 36, 2340, 10.1080/09593330.2015.1027284 · DOI
  99. Pal, 2017, A flux-enhancing forward osmosis–nanofiltration integrated treatment system for the tannery wastewater reclamation, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 24, 15768, 10.1007/s11356-017-9206-z · DOI
  100. Pal, 2019, Modelling forward osmosis-nanofiltration integrated process for treatment and recirculation of leather industry wastewater, Comput. Chem. Eng., 127, 99, 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2019.05.018 · DOI
  101. Kamali, 2015, Review on recent developments on pulp and paper mill wastewater treatment, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 114, 326, 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2014.05.005 · DOI
  102. Vashi, 2018, Aerobic granulation: a recent development on the biological treatment of pulp and paper wastewater, Environ. Technol. Innov., 9, 265, 10.1016/j.eti.2017.12.006 · DOI
  103. Toczyłowska-Mamińska, 2017, Limits and perspectives of pulp and paper industry wastewater treatment–a review, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 78, 764, 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.021 · DOI
  104. Lee, 2014, Phosphorus removal by NF90 membrane: optimisation using central composite design, J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng., 45, 1260, 10.1016/j.jtice.2014.02.011 · DOI
  105. Khosravi, 2011, Membrane process design for the reduction of wastewater color of the Mazandaran pulp-paper industry, Iran, Water resources management, 25, 2989, 10.1007/s11269-011-9794-1 · DOI
  106. Caldeira, 2021, A case study on the treatment and recycling of the effluent generated from a thermo-mechanical pulp mill in Brazil after the installation of a new bleaching process, Sci. Total Environ., 763
  107. Gönder, 2011, Advanced treatment of pulp and paper mill wastewater by nanofiltration process: Effects of operating conditions on membrane fouling, Sep. Purif. Technol., 76, 292, 10.1016/j.seppur.2010.10.018 · DOI
  108. Kaya, 2010, The effect of transmembrane pressure and pH on treatment of paper machine process waters by using a two-step nanofiltration process: Flux decline analysis, Desalination, 250, 150, 10.1016/j.desal.2009.06.034 · DOI
  109. Ebrahimi, 2016, Treatment of the bleaching effluent from sulfite pulp production by ceramic membrane filtration, Membranes, 6, 7, 10.3390/membranes6010007 · DOI
  110. Shukla, 2013, Membrane filtration of chlorination and extraction stage bleach plant effluent in Indian paper industry, Clean Techn. Environ. Policy, 15, 235, 10.1007/s10098-012-0501-6 · DOI
  111. Strade, 2020, Water efficiency and safe re-use of different grades of water-Topical issues for the pharmaceutical industry, Water Resour. Ind., 24, 10.1016/j.wri.2020.100132 · DOI
  112. Gadipelly, 2014, Pharmaceutical industry wastewater: review of the technologies for water treatment and reuse, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 53, 11571, 10.1021/ie501210j · DOI
  113. de Souza, 2018, Nanofiltration for the removal of norfloxacin from pharmaceutical effluent, Journal of EnvironmentalChem. Eng., 6, 6147
  114. Azaïs, 2014, Nanofiltration for wastewater reuse: counteractive effects of fouling and matrice on the rejection of pharmaceutical active compounds, Sep. Purif. Technol., 133, 313, 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.07.007 · DOI
  115. Yangali-Quintanilla, 2010, Proposing nanofiltration as acceptable barrier for organic contaminants in water reuse, J. Membr. Sci., 362, 334, 10.1016/j.memsci.2010.06.058 · DOI
  116. Maryam, 2020, A study on behavior, interaction and rejection of paracetamol, diclofenac and ibuprofen (PhACs) from wastewater by nanofiltration membranes, Environ. Technol. Innov., 18, 10.1016/j.eti.2020.100641 · DOI
  117. Wang, 2015, Performance and fate of organics in a pilot MBR–NF for treating antibiotic production wastewater with recycling NF concentrate, Chemosphere, 121, 92, 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.11.034 · DOI
  118. Yacouba, 2021, Removal of organic micropollutants from domestic wastewater: the effect of ozone-based advanced oxidation process on nanofiltration, J. Water Process Eng., 39, 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101869 · DOI
  119. Thakura, 2015, Treating complex industrial wastewater in a new membrane-integrated closed loop system for recovery and reuse, Clean Techn. Environ. Policy, 17, 2299, 10.1007/s10098-015-0971-4 · DOI
  120. Darvishmanesh, 2011, Performance of solvent resistant nanofiltration membranes for purification of residual solvent in the pharmaceutical industry: experiments and simulation, Green Chem., 13, 3476, 10.1039/c1gc15462a · DOI
  121. Martínez, 2013, Effect of impurities in the recovery of 1-(5-bromo-fur-2-il)-2-bromo-2-nitroethane using nanofiltration, Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif., 70, 241, 10.1016/j.cep.2013.03.015 · DOI
  122. Panagopoulos, 2019, Desalination brine disposal methods and treatment technologies-a review, Sci. Total Environ., 693, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.351 · DOI
  123. McLaughlin, 2020, Mutagenicity assessment downstream of oil and gas produced water discharges intended for agricultural beneficial reuse, Sci. Total Environ., 715, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136944 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ahmad, N. N. R., Ang, W. L., Teow, Y. H., Mohammad, A. W., & Hilal, N.
Venue
Journal of Water Process Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
45
Pages
102478
ISSN
2214-7144
DOI
10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102478
Cited by
188
References
0
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2023-12-01)
Licence
Funders
  • Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (KK-2019-001)
  • New York University Abu Dhabi

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