3 ms·

MOF’s are not mass produced, and while a method has been proposed to scale up production, as far as I know it’s never been tested. It’s also a solvent-heavy pro

MOF’s are not mass produced, and while a method has been proposed to scale up production, as far as I know it’s never been tested. It’s also a solvent-heavy process, and often uses a lot of benzene. MIT the university is an amazing thing, but MIT the press release machine is pathetic.

gene-h 9y ago
MOFs aren't mass produced, but it is possible to produce large quantities of them. BASF has been able to make double-digit tonnage quantities of MOFs per a single production run[0]. It much simpler to make MOFs than other nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes and graphene. The MOF used in the paper is somewhat expensive as it uses zirconium, but it is possible that MOFs based on other metal ions could be used. [0]https://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i51/Materials-Chemistry-Metal-Organic-Frameworks.html https://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i51/Materials-Chemistry-Meta...
- philipkglass 9y ago
  Zircon (zirconium raw material) isn't very expensive. Removing hafnium from zirconium compounds to reach nuclear-application purity is expensive. Reducing zirconium compounds to metal is expensive. The authors start with zirconyl chloride, which doesn't have either of those expensive requirements. For anyone else wanting to read the full paper, it's open access in Nature Communications: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03162-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03162-7
- portofcall 9y ago
  It much simpler to make MOFs than other nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes and graphene. Well yes, but nanomaterials are tough to make, and mass produced graphene is a nightmare. None of that changes the energy requirements to make the stuff, or the hazardous byproducts of production. If it’s not energetically and financially efficient, then it doesn’t compete with desalination, and is useless.

3 ms·

MOF’s are not mass produced, and while a method has been proposed to scale up production, as far as I know it’s never been tested. It’s also a solvent-heavy pro

by portofcall 9y ago

gene-h 9y ago
MOFs aren't mass produced, but it is possible to produce large quantities of them. BASF has been able to make double-digit tonnage quantities of MOFs per a single production run[0]. It much simpler to make MOFs than other nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes and graphene. The MOF used in the paper is somewhat expensive as it uses zirconium, but it is possible that MOFs based on other metal ions could be used. [0]https://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i51/Materials-Chemistry-Metal-Organic-Frameworks.html https://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i51/Materials-Chemistry-Meta...
- philipkglass 9y ago
  Zircon (zirconium raw material) isn't very expensive. Removing hafnium from zirconium compounds to reach nuclear-application purity is expensive. Reducing zirconium compounds to metal is expensive. The authors start with zirconyl chloride, which doesn't have either of those expensive requirements. For anyone else wanting to read the full paper, it's open access in Nature Communications: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03162-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03162-7
- portofcall 9y ago
  It much simpler to make MOFs than other nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes and graphene. Well yes, but nanomaterials are tough to make, and mass produced graphene is a nightmare. None of that changes the energy requirements to make the stuff, or the hazardous byproducts of production. If it’s not energetically and financially efficient, then it doesn’t compete with desalination, and is useless.