Waste-derived thermal storage solutions for sustainable solar desalination using discarded engine oil and paraffin wax: A techno-environmental feasibility evaluation

• Main Authors: Suraparaju, Subbarama Kousik, Mahendran, Samykano, Natarajan, Sendhil Kumar, Rajamony, Reji Kumar, Pandey, Adarsh Kumar
• Format: Article
• Language: English; English
• Published: Elsevier 2024
• Subjects: TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery
• Online Access: http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/42212/1/Waste-derived%20thermal%20storage%20solutions%20for%20sustainable%20solar%20desalination_ABST.pdf; http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/42212/2/Waste-derived%20thermal%20storage%20solutions%20for%20sustainable%20solar%20desalination.pdf; http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/42212/; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2024.117318; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2024.117318
• Institution: Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah

The valorization and repurposing of waste materials for sustainable outcomes and environmental mitigation are gaining prominence. This investigation explores the feasibility of repurposing discarded automotive engine oil as a viable means of energy storage in solar thermal desalination applications. A novel approach combining discarded engine oil with Paraffin wax in equal parts by volume is proposed as a composite energy storage (CES) to enhance nocturnal production and efficiency. The experimental findings show that the composite energy storage system has 26.54 % higher thermal conductivity and 44.66 % greater specific heat energy storage capacity compared to pure paraffin wax. Comparing the Desalination System with Engine Oil-based Energy Storage (DSEES) to a Traditional Solar Desalination System (TSDS) without energy storage, considering water and absorber temperatures and distillate production, reveals compelling advantages. DSEES exhibits remarkable temperature increases of 14 % in the basin and 11 % in water, alongside a significant 52.72 % rise in distillate production rates, yielding 3.36 and 3.16 l/sq.mt compared to TSDS's 2.2 and 2.1 l/sq.mt over two testing days. Cost analysis indicates DSEES's 33.7 % lower cost per liter and 33.8 % shorter payback period relative to TSDS. Furthermore, environmental assessment highlights DSEES's 60.8 % greater net carbon credit, indicating reduced ecological impact.