applied

sciences
Review
Recent Advances in H2S Removal from Gas Streams
Francisco Jose Alguacil

Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Metalurgicas (CENIM-CSIC), Avda. Gregorio del Amo 8,

28040 Madrid, Spain; fjalgua@cenim.csic.es

Abstract: Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic and corrosive gas; thus, in order to mitigate its environmental
impact, its capture and removal from various emitting sources, natural and anthropogenic, is of a
necessity. In this work, recent advances (2020–2022) proposed by a series of investigations are re-
viewed. Adsorption using metal-oxide-based adsorbents appeared to be the most popular technology,
whereas solvent absorption is used to co-absorb both toxic H2 S and CO2 . The uses of the various
membrane technologies for H2 S removal are also described.

Keywords: absorption; adsorption; hydrogen sulfide; membranes; removal

1. Introduction
Hydrogen sulfide is a chemical in a close relationship with mankind, though this
relationship is not connected only to its benefits but to the high grade of toxicity that it
presents against humans and the environment. Hydrogen sulfide can be emitted both by
natural and anthropogenic activities. This gas occurs naturally in the oceans, as well as other
locations such as other bodies of water, volcanoes, etc., and gas and petroleum deposits.
Anthropogenic causes produce H2 S via releasing naturally occurring H2 S from
petroleum and natural gas processing; other causes which release this toxic gas include
localizations of municipal wastes, biogas manufacturing, and sewerage. Though impor-
tant, the generation of H2 S is not a major part of the total emission of natural sulfur gas
emissions, which relapsed in dimethyl sulfide and SO2 . Other anthropogenic causes of
Citation: Alguacil, F.J. Recent
H2 S generation include wastewater processing, which yields undesirable products such as
Advances in H2 S Removal from Gas
activated sludge. This waste is organic matter, and from this an important part is protein.
Streams. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217.
Both reductive bacteria and methane bacteria are also responsible for the generation of
https://doi.org/10.3390/ H2 S [1]. The unpleasant odor of the sludge is caused from the above compounds that orig-
app13053217 inated in the sewage sludge [2]. Pigs and cattle farms also release ammonia and organic
sulfur into the environment; moreover, the immunity of some of these animals is achieved
Academic Editor: Antonio
due to the inclusion of methionine into the animals’ regular feed. However, this releases
Di Bartolomeo
undesirable excretions [3,4]. Natural gas is replaced in the steel industry by the use of coke
Received: 30 January 2023 oven gas [5]. Due to the presence of sulfur in the coal, H2 S is formed, and this species is
Revised: 15 February 2023 undesirable since it promotes corrosion and formation of the also undesirable SOx volatile
Accepted: 27 February 2023 species. Kraft mills also contribute to the generation of H2 S and other sulfur-based gases.
Published: 2 March 2023 From the above, it is obvious that there is a need to capture and treat both anthro-
pogenic and naturally occurring H2 S when necessary and due to the toxic characteristics of
this gas. The present manuscript describes recent advances (2020–2022) in the technologies
used for H2 S removal from various sources. Moreover, due to its practical importance,
Copyright: © 2023 by the author.
some investigations related to the separation CO2 /H2 S are described.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
2. The Technologies
distributed under the terms and
2.1. Absorption Processes to Remove Hazardous H2 S from Gas Streams
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// This technology uses both chemical and physical solvents and is one of the most
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ preferred to remove H2 S from these gas streams. The use of chemical solvents mitigates the
4.0/). presence of H2 S in the corresponding phase.

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13053217 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 2 of 14

Among these chemicals, alkanolamine solutions know a wide usefulness because,

together with toxic H2 S, the solvent removes CO2 [6].
One step ahead the use of conventional solvents, ionic liquids are considered as
their reliable alternatives. The well-known singularities or properties that these chemicals
make are gaining positions on H2 S removal [7]. The use of mixtures (AAILs) of tertiary
amines and ionic liquids (amino acid) to remove H2 S was investigated in [8]. Among
these compounds, tetramethylammonium arginine and tetramethylammonium glycine,
[N111][Arg] and [N1111][Gly], respectively, presented H2 S removal rates of 100%. The rate
of gas removal is increased when transferring protons between the ionic liquid and the
tertiary amine. Larger-scale applications of the method seemed to be unpractical due to the
costs and complex synthesis of the ionic liquids.
In term of costs, deep eutectic solvents (DESs) are an option to ionic liquids. Interaction
between H2 S and DES (basic) does not imply chemical reaction. Functionalizing these deep
eutectic solvents with some chemicals, including amines, and oxidizing reagents produced
an increase in the absorptive and regenerative properties of the compounds [9]. The
addition of polyethyleneimine to deep eutectic solvents was investigated [10], the mixture
having 90% H2 S removal efficiencies after four consecutive absorption–regeneration cycles.
Nanofluids also emerged as potential absorbents for H2 S. These absorbents are formed
by dispersion of several inorganic compounds (SiO2 , Al2 O3 ) in the form of nanoparticles
or graphene oxide and carbon nanotubes into organic solvents (monoethanolamine, di-
ethanolamine, etc.) [11]. Removal of H2 S via the use of Fe-Monoethanolamine-BmimCl
solution with inert nanoparticles (SiO2 ) presented good perspectives, though H2 S removal
efficiency decreased after continuous use (cycles) [12]. Table 1 presents some references
about the use of various absorbents on H2 S removal.

Table 1. Removal by absorption technologies of H2 S and other gases.

Solvent Gas Stream Contactor Temperature % Capture Reference

NaCl H2 S and NH3 in N2 Column 25◦C Near 99 [13]
Fe-EDTA and others H2 S and CO2 in CH4 Column Ambient 100 [14]
ChCl and others H2 S in N2 Bubbled stirrer reactor 30–70 ◦ C 100 [10]
MDEA H2 S and CO2 in N2 Rotating packed bed 30–45 ◦ C Near 100 [15]
Modified lye H2 S in N2 reactor No data 98 [16]
Yellow phosphorous
H2 S in N2 Bubble reactor 55–80 ◦ C 88 [17]
and phosphate rock

Some of the difficulties presented by conventional solvents appeared to be resolved

with the use of these ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents; however, some of the
properties of these compounds, i.e., high viscosity, can be considered a drawback since it
reduces mass transfer coefficients and thus causes an increase in energy demand [18]. The
use of mixtures of these compounds can improve the removal of the toxic gas; however, the
greatest negative impact of these mixtures is the lack of maintaining the removal properties
after continuous use [19]. A new perspective has been raised in terms of improving the
regeneration step to avoid this being lost in the absorption properties.
Various triethylenetetramine functionalized ionic liquids (TETAH-ILs) are mixed with
ethylene glycol (EG) to investigate their performance on H2 S absorption [20]. The results
showed that the mixture 10% [TETAH][BF4]-EG presented the best absorption capacities
(1.128 mol H2 S/mol IL) at 30 ◦ C and 100 mL/min. Removal of H2 S is attributed to the
formation of H2 S-IL compounds via hydrogen bonds.
A bubble absorption column is used to investigate hydrodynamics of CO2 and H2 S
removal from pure water and water containing nanofluids dispersed with neat and OH-
and NH2 -functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes [21]. Sodium dodecyl sulfate is
used as surfactant and stabilizer. Maximum CO2 removal and H2 S removal are found to be
0.0038 mmol/m2 ·s and 0.056 mmol/m2 ·s using NH2 -MWCNTs/nanofluid, respectively.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 3 of 14

The improvement in the absorption properties of diethanolamine with respect to the

removal of H2 S from sour industrial off gas was investigated in [22]. The influence of lean
amine H2 S impurity (LAHI), lean amine temperature (LAT), and column pressure (CP) on
H2 S removal was studied. The increase of LAHI and LAT is detrimental for H2 S removal
from the gas stream and LAT, LAHI (83%) being the key factor on H2 S removal, whereas
LAT (15%) and CP (2%) have a minor impact on this efficiency.
The next investigation used machine-learning operations to study the solubility of H2 S
in fifteen ionic liquids [23]. No less than six machine-learning operations were used, and the
respective results were compared. The conclusions showed that the least-squares support
vector machine predicted H2 S solubility into the ionic liquids well with R2 (0.99798), RMSE
(0.01079), MSE (0.00012), RRSE (6.35%), RAE (4.35%), MAE (0.0060), and AARD (4.03). It
was found that H2 S solubility decreased with temperature and has a direct dependence
with the pressure. Ionic liquids such as [OMIM][Tf2N] are the best choice for H2 S capture.
The next investigation [24] explored various aspects of the processing and technologies
used in acid gas removal (AGR). The work summarized processing by chemical absorption
and mechanisms involved in the removal process; it also showed the main amine-based
solvents currently used in such tasks. Absorption by physical methods is also discussed,
summarizing pros and cons of the most used absorbents. Industrial applications of AGR
processes were considered.
The removal of H2 S from industrial gas streams using an iron/copper bimetallic
catalytic oxidation desulfurization system was investigated in [25]. The absorbent is
formed by adding N-methyl pyrrolidone (NMP) and CuCl2 aqueous solution to an iron-
based ionic liquid (Fe-IL). The acidity and viscosity of the system are greatly reduced by
addition of NMP and water, improving gas–liquid mass transfer efficiency. The presence
of the copper(II) salt increased the oxidative properties of the solution, allowing for the
improvement of the Fe3+ catalytic influence on the oxidation of H2 S to the monomer form
of sulfur.

2.2. Adsorption Processes to Remove Hazardous H2 S from Gas Streams

Various materials: metal oxides, zeolites, activated carbon, metal organic frameworks
(MOFs), biochar, mesoporous silica, ash, and composite materials have been investigated
in the removal of H2 S from gas streams. Selection of these materials is based in some of
their properties, such as elevated uptake capacity, selectivity, and thermal and mechan-
ical stability with respect to the removal of this toxic gas [26]. Table 2 shows some of
these investigations.

Table 2. H2 S removal by adsorption processing.

Adsorbent SBET , m2 /g Conditions H2 S Capacity Reference

Modified biosolid
110–180 [H2 S] = 1000 ppm 89–221 mg/g [27]
adsorbent
[H2 S] = 38–73 ppm
MoO2 nanoparticle 48–65 0.033–0.081 g/g [28]
T = 65–89 ◦ C
[H2 S] = 30–120 ppm
Modified zeolite 333–550 14.7–70 mg/g [29]
T = 100–300 ◦ C
DES supported on [H2 S] = 800 ppm
124–133 3.9–14 mg/g [30]
fumed silica T = 20–60 ◦ C
Carbon adsorbents 229–3217 [H2 S] = 20 ppm 6.3–25.7 mmol/g [31]
Jute-derived ◦C
1065–2580 T = 25 T 6.5–50 mmol/g [32]
nanoporous carbons
Cu-modified [H2 S] = 0.46 mg/L
981–1769 22.4–76 mg/g [33]
activated carbon T = 25–110 ◦ C

A mixture of biosolid (sewage) and surfactant (pluronic surfactant F127, heated at

950 ◦ C) was used for the adsorption of H2 S in [27]. It was shown that the presence of the
surfactant increased the mesopore volume and carbon content of the biosolid, whereas the
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 4 of 14

treatment at 950 ◦ C developed the micropores, leading to the dispersal of the catalytic sites
(Ca and Fe oxides) responsible for the gas adsorption, and increased the nitrogen atoms of
pyrrolitic nature. Besides adsorption, the catalytic sites provide an environment to promote
the oxidation of H2 S to elemental sulfur. As a consequence, the breakthrough capacity is
greatly improved (250% better than that presented by the biosolid alone); moreover, this
capacity (221.2 mg/g) is better than those derived from other adsorbents such as STIX®
(North Tonawanda, NY, USA) (201 mg/g), S-208 (36 mg/g), or Centaur® (Mumbai, India)
(176 mg/g).
Metal oxides presented have good properties for adsorbing H2 S; however, there is a
continuous effort to improve their characteristics in this important field. Adsorption of H2 S
by molybdenum(IV) oxide nanoparticles is described in the literature [28]. The best results
are achieved at 0.081 and 0.074 g H2 S/g, at a temperature of 85 ◦ C, pressure of 16 bar, and
superficial velocity of 0.018 m/s. The above capacities are obtained when the adsorbent
presents non-spherical and spherical shapes and using an initial H2 S concentration of
43 ppm in the feed gas stream. MnO2 is the most effective adsorbent compared with other
composite nano-sized metal oxides such as NiO/TiO2, CoO/TiO2 , graphite oxide/ZnO,
and CuO/TiO2 .
Zeolites are other group of adsorbent materials of a wide use in several fields; some of
the properties of these materials, i.e., elevated porosity and surface areas and porosities, are
responsible for the wide use of these materials, including the removal of H2 S. Y and ZSM-5
zeolites’ properties (including surface and pore structure) have been modified by the use of
magnetite nanoparticles [29], being the performance, with respect to the H2 S removal, of
both adsorbents at the temperatures in the 100–300 ◦ C range at a pilot scale.
Activated carbons and biochars are other types of adsorbents with active adsorption
sites. Jute thread waste (a cellulosic biomass) activated with KOH served to yield a N–S-
rich nanoporous carbon [34]. The carbon has a pore volume of up to 1.50 cm3 /g and a
surface area of up to 2580 m2 /g. Within this material, increasing the pressure increased
the H2 S adsorption capacity by 1 bar (19.1 mmol/g), 10 bar (32.6 mmol/g), and 35 bar
(45.0 mmol/g). Again, the presence of pyrrolic-N atoms in the material helps with H2 S
uptake onto it, this being attributable to hydrogen bonds; at the same time, negatively
charged sulfur atoms around the pyrrolic-N atoms are responsible for a physisorption
process. This material presented an 84% of adsorption regeneration after five cycles.
Using a peanut shell as precursor, impregnated with copper and activated by KOH,
an activated carbon was formed and used to investigate the removal of H2 S [34]. The best
sample of the activated carbon has 1523.2 m2 /g of surface area, with 97.6 mg/g of gas
uptake. The non-linear Langmuir isotherm model best fits the experimental results:

[H2 S]m,a KL [H2 S]e

[H2 S]e,a = (1)
1 + KL [H2 S]e

where [H2 S]e,a is the gas uptake at an elapsed time, [H2 S]m,a is the maximum monolayer
uptake capacity, KL is Langmuir constant, which is related to the affinity, and [H2 S]e is the
gas uptake at the equilibrium. The kinetic displayed pseudo-first-order trend:

[H2 S]t = [H2 S]e (1 − exp(k1 t)) (2)

In the above equation, [H2 S]t is the uptake at an elapsed time, [H2 S]e is the gas uptake
at the equilibrium, and k1 is the rate constant of the pseudo-first-order model. Both film
diffusion and intraparticle models are responsible for H2 S uptake onto the adsorbent. After
five cycles, the adsorbent maintains a gas removal rate of 90%.
Biochar, biomass ashes, and sewage sludge (incinerated) are used to compare their
performance on H2 S from a biogas [35]. Sewage sludge is discarded due to its surface
characteristics and low porosity. Biochar exhibited the highest adsorption capacity of
171.8 mg/g, its low density translated into low volumetric adsorption capacity, limiting its
scale-up. Biomass ashes have the highest volumetric adsorption uptakes, 22.2–38.3 mg/cm3
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 5 of 14

(35.6–78.2 mg/g), attributable to their porosity properties and the presence of mineral oxides
responsible for the catalytic H2 S oxidation. Biochar has the highest adsorption uptake
(171.8 mg/g), but its use at a greater scale is limited by its low density.
It is known that activated carbons incorporating metal or metal oxides have enhanced
their H2 S removal efficiencies [36]. Several investigations [37,38] have surveyed the life-
cycle cost and the environmental footprints/impact of these hybrid materials. Biochars
derived from banana peel, rice hull, and sawdust by pyrolysis are used as adsorbents of
H2 S from municipal solid waste [39]. The order for removal efficiency of H2 S (>94%) was
banana peel > saw dust > rice hull.
The use of a goethite-based material to adsorb H2 S from a mimic biogas mixture (H2 S
and N2 ) was described in [40]. In the process, crystalline FeS was formed.
With respect to pristine s-C3N6 (−0.33 eV to −0.45 eV), Fe-, Pt-, and Ti-modified
s-C3N6 structures (−1.06 eV to −2.66 eV) presented larger adsorption energies for the
removal of H2 S on their surfaces [41]. s-C3N6-Fe has semiconducting properties after
adsorbing this harmful gas. Pristine s-C3N6 and its modified derivatives represented a
series of smart adsorbents and sensing media for toxic gases.
The defective GaSe monolayer material having selenium vacancies and being doped
with oxygen and nitrogen is another material to be considered in the removal of toxic gases
from gaseous streams [42]. After gas adsorption, the distance between the defective GaSe
monolayer and four toxic molecules is reduced.
An activated carbon-fiber mat containing both metal chlorides and metal oxides is
used to investigate H2 S (and ammonia) removal [43]. The adsorbent, containing NiCl2
and MgO, has a hierarchical porous structure, large surface area, and a good dispersion
of bimetallic active sites. Metal oxides promote the chemical adsorption of H2 S. The use
of these ternary hybrid materials increases gas uptake with breakthrough capacities up to
209.2 mg/g.
Adsorbent materials from banana empty fruit bunch biochar (BEFBB) and banana peel
biochar (BPB) wastes are used to remove H2 S from biogas [44]. Both types of adsorbents
have good characteristics to remove H2 S (low performance in the case of CO2 and methane),
with breakthrough capacities of 7.65 mg/g and 5.85 mg/g, respectively. Pellet-sized
adsorbent (0.5 cm) has a better gas removal efficiency than larger pellets (1.5 cm), this being
attributable to its larger surface area. Both hydroxide and carboxylic groups present in the
BEFBB material are responsible for the removal of H2 S from the gas stream.
Spent Fenton-like reagents are another type of material to be considered as potential
materials to remove H2 S. Rice straw biochar and a spent Fenton-like reagent are used to
prepare an adsorbent to investigate the removal of toxic H2 S [45]. With the inclusion of the
Fenton reagent, the number of active sites on the biochar is increased, and the adsorbent
specific surface area is decreased, the maximum gas uptake being up to 1000.6 mg/g at
120 ◦ C. The presence of copper oxide in the adsorbent is responsible for the gas adsorption,
whereas cuprous sulfide, copper sulfide, and elemental sulfur appeared in the adsorbent
after hydrogen sulfide removal.
The use of copper and biochar produced a low cost H2 S adsorbent (Cu2.56WRS300),
which is used in the adsorption of H2 S [46]. Again, the presence of copper leads to the
formation of copper oxide sites on the surface of the hybrid material, and these active sites
increase H2 S uptake onto the adsorbent, with a gas uptake of 1191.1 mg/g. Chemisorption
is the key step in the removal of the hazardous gas from the stream. The hybrid adsorbent
presented convenient regeneration.

2.3. Membranes and Membrane Contactors to Remove Hazardous H2 S from Gas Streams
The membranes as a separation technology are widely used in a variety of industries,
and this wide usefulness is attributable to the properties or characteristics of the technol-
ogy: modular aspects, easiness of operation, low environmental impact, etc., that in many
aspects surpassed the offer presented by other separation technologies, this being specially
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 6 of 14

noted when the operation, i.e., H2 S removal, is accomplished in areas or locations where
communications are not easy [47].
There are some recent publications reviewing the use of these membrane technologies
on the treatment of gases [48–51], but surprisingly, they are dedicated to industrial gases
instead of H2 S; some of the gases mentioned in these reviews are: nitrogen, hydrogen,
oxygen, CO2 , etc. In the case of H2 S, polymeric membranes are the candidates to resolve
this important industrial issue. The permeation of gas across these types of membranes is
ruled by diffusion, and a series of investigations [52,53] have mentioned that plasticization
of the membrane performs well in the removal of H2 S when the gas in the stream is present
at high concentrations; moreover, this plasticization improves the selective separation
of H2 S over methane. This selective separation is attributed to the transport mechanism,
which in the case of H2 S is of sorptive in nature, and this separation is negatively influenced
by diffusion.
The transport ruled by solubility is particularly important in the case of rubbery
polymers, and this is a key rule in the separation of H2 S from methane. It is reported [54]
that the variation of the cross-linking density tuned the usefulness of polyethylene glycol-
based membranes. This change in the membrane properties significantly improves the
selectivity in the pairs H2 S/methane and CO2 /methane.
Table 3 summarizes some of the recent literature about the use of membranes on
H2 S removal.

Table 3. H2 S removal by membrane technologies.

Membrane Feed Gas Working Conditions H2 S Capture Reference

Crosslinked poly(ethylene T = 25◦C
5% H2 S 0.08–25 barrier [54]
glycol membrane P = 800 psi
Vinyl-poly(norborene) T = 25 ◦ C Depending on feed gas
5–20% H2 S [55]
membrane P = 800 psi composition
T = 35–50 ◦ C
Cellulose triacetate HFM 20 mol% H2 S 140 GPU [52]
P = 6.9–31.9 bar
T = 35 ◦ C
Dense polymer membrane 0.5–20% H2 S Depending on membrane type [53]
P = 7–46 bar
T = 22 ◦ C
Copolymide membranes 20% H2 S Depending on membrane type [56]
P = 24–46 bar

Computational methods have developed a series of tools to improve the knowledge

and optimize the use of these membrane technologies in the capture of gases [57]. Another
implication of membrane technologies on the removal of gases is their use to act as an
interface between the different streams, liquid and gases, feeding the removal process.
These membranes, preferably with high porosity, increased the gas flow through the
membrane structure. In practice, hollow fiber modules are the most used devices; under
operation, the gas flowing in the shell side diffuses across the membrane’s pores to the tube
side; here, the gas is conveniently absorbed by a solution, whereas these modules can be
operated in co-current and counter-current form, and the latter is usually preferred since it
gives a better contact between both operating phases. This counter-current configuration is
shown in Figure 1.
In these membrane modules, the gas flux is controlled by its concentration gradi-
ent [58]. Mass transfer in the module is conveniently represented in Figure 2. Some
parameters to be controlled in these hollow fiber operations are pore size and its distribu-
tion [59], and these assured the best transfer across the module fibers. Some improvements
in the technology are described in the literature [60].
 the membrane structure. In practice, hollow fiber modules are the most used devices;
under operation, the gas flowing in the shell side diffuses across the membrane’s pores to
the tube side; here, the gas is conveniently absorbed by a solution, whereas these
modules can be operated in co-current and counter-current form, and the latter is usually
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 preferred since it gives a better contact between both operating phases. 7 of 14 This

counter-current configuration is shown in Figure 1.

, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Figure 1. 1.
Figure Hollow
Hollowfiber
fibermembrane modulefor
membrane module forgas
gas removal
removal in counter-current
in counter-current operational
operational mode.mode.

In these membrane modules, the gas flux is controlled by its concentration gradient
[58]. Mass transfer in the module is conveniently represented in Figure 2. Some
parameters to be controlled in these hollow fiber operations are pore size and its
distribution [59], and these assured the best transfer across the module fibers. Some
improvements in the technology are described in the literature [60].

Figure 2. Mass transfer

Figure 2. in thetransfer
Mass hollowin fiber module.
the hollow fiber Multiple curve black
module. Multiple lines lines
curve black represented
represented mem-
membrane micropores.
brane micropores.

The use of an ionomer

The use of material (PFSA)
an ionomer as a (PFSA)
material membrane material inmaterial
as a membrane the removal of
in the removal of
H2 S from a gas stream is described in [61]. Experimental work has considered a series of
H2S from a gas stream is described in [61]. Experimental work has considered a series of
variables in the investigation, including humidity, temperature, and pressure. It has been
variables in the investigation, including humidity, temperature, and pressure. It has been
demonstrated that the ionomer material has a great dependence on temperature and water
demonstrated that the and
activity ionomer materialmaterial
is an excellent has a great dependence
to separate gases fromonmixtures
temperature
of them,andi.e., H2 S is
water activity and is an excellent material to separate gases from
conveniently separate from CO2 and CH4 from a ternary gas mixture. mixtures of them, i.e.,
H2S is conveniently separate frommembrane
Hollow fiber CO2 and CH 4 from a(HFMBs)
bioreactors ternary gasare mixture.
used to investigate the removal
Hollow fiber membrane
of H 2 S at bioreactors (HFMBs) are used to investigate the
various bed residence times [62] and other operational removalpH,
variables: of biomass
H2S at various bed
types,residence
etc. H2 S times [62]
removal and other
is higher whenoperational variables:
biotic bioreactors pH, biomass
are used, sulfate being the
types, etc. H2S removal is higher when biotic bioreactors are used, sulfate being
principal species encountered in the reactor after the end of the operation. Datathe
about other
operational results are included in the reference.
principal species encountered in the reactor after the end of the operation. Data about
A biogas containing ammonia and H S is cleaned in a hollow fiber membrane biore-
other operational results are included in the reference.2
actor [63]. Under different operational conditions, both gases are eliminated (up to 99%)
A biogas containing ammonia
from the biogas, and aHgreater
H2 S having 2S is cleaned in a hollow fiber membrane
critical loading rate than ammonia. After operation,
bioreactor [63]. Under
differentdifferent operational
sulfur-bearing speciesconditions, bothtogether
(SO and sulfate) gases are eliminated
with (upfound
nitrogen are to in the
99%) from the biogas, H2S having a greater critical loading rate than ammonia. After
operation, different sulfur-bearing species (SO and sulfate) together with nitrogen are
found in the bioreactor. This device is filled by several biomasses, including
Sulfuricurvum sp., Smithella sp., Sulfuritales sp., Rhodanobacter sp., and Thiobacillus sp.
The removal of toxic H2S gas has also been investigated using a lignin carbon-based
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 8 of 14

bioreactor. This device is filled by several biomasses, including Sulfuricurvum sp., Smithella
sp., Sulfuritales sp., Rhodanobacter sp., and Thiobacillus sp.
The removal of toxic H2 S gas has also been investigated using a lignin carbon-based
membrane [64]. From this material, and after carbonization, an alkali lignocarbon is derived,
and from this several hybrid materials are also derived using casting methodology (Table 4).

Table 4. Different alkali lignocarbon-based materials used in the removal of H2 S.

Raw Material Plasticizers Dopants Acronym

CLA/PVA
Alkali lignocarbon
Glycerol and water nano-CuO and Cu2+ CuO-CLA/PVA-1
and polivynil alcohol
Cu-CLA/PVA-2

Results indicated that the inclusion of copper species into the raw material clearly
improves the deodorization properties of these Cu-bearing composites if compared with
those of the pristine raw material. It was also demonstrated that in the copper-doped
hybrid materials, nano-CuO is the key active site in the H2 S removal from the gas stream.

3. Simultaneous and Selective H2 S–CO2 Removal: A Case Study

In practice, it is normal that both H2 S and CO2 appeared together in gas streams; thus,
the removal of both from the stream can be accomplished by two different approaches: (i) se-
lective H2 S-CO2 removal and (ii) simultaneous CO2 and H2 S removal. Some proposals
about the two styles of processing are summarized in Tables 5 and 6.

Table 5. Technologies for the selective H2 S-CO2 removal.

Technology Characteristics Industrial Use Reference

Dimethyl ether of polyethylene glycol Yes
Physical absorption [65]
N-methyl-2-pyrrolidene Yes
Ionic liquid absorption Ionic liquids No [66]
Hybrid membrane Supported liquid membranes No [67]
Iron-oxide-based materials Yes
Adsorption on pristine materials [26,68]
Molecular sieves-based materials Yes
Metal oxide/silica No
Adsorption on composite materials [26,68]
Metal oxide/activated carbon No

Since both gases have similar affinities and characteristics, the simultaneous removal
of both species may have a series of benefits, since this removal can be carried out using
known technologies: absorption, adsorption, and membranes.
It is said in [69] that the removal of H2 S has a higher cost than that of CO2 , costs
which are increased by the operating and capital expenses in relation with what is used in
the removal process. Thus, the removal of H2 S and CO2 is possible by the use of known
carbon capture and storage technologies; also of consideration is the fact that CO2 and H2 S
competed in the transport, which on one hand points to the influence of CO2 with respect
to H2 S removal and, on the contrary, H2 S towards CO2 removal [26]. The above implies
that environmental laws were not fulfilled in relation to tolerable limits, which at the end
resulted in an increase of the operational costs.
Some other investigations about the selective H2 S/CO2 removal are summarized
next. As is mentioned above, ionic liquids are a series of chemicals proposed to remove
H2 S from gas streams. Some of these chemicals are investigated to separate CO2 and
H2 S from methane and water [70]. Density functional theory investigations demonstrated
the selective separation of H2 S from CO2 . This gas bonds to the nitrogen of the anion of
the ionic liquid and forms a new C[sbnd]N bond, and H2 S transfers a proton to one of
the nitrogen atoms of the ionic liquid; thus, HS- is formed. Other simulations show that
methane has weaker interactions with this type of chemical than CO2 and H2 S.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 9 of 14

The selective separation of H2 S from an acid gas mixture using an acid gas enrichment
unit (AGEU) was investigated in [71]. The operation uses absorption with NaOH solutions;
however, the addition of Na2 CO3 and NaHCO3 to the alkali solution avoids CO2 absorption
and thus favored the selective separation of H2 S. Different operational results are included
in the work.
H2 S is selectively separated using a column filled with 2-tertiarybutylamino-2-
ethoxyethanol [72], and the results are compared to those derived by the use of
methyldiethanolamine as an absorbent. In fact, with the latter, the experimental selective
factor was found to be 3.88, whereas in the case of the former, the value increased to
15.81. Other relevant simultaneous H2 S/CO2 removal investigations are resumed below.

Table 6. Technologies for the simultaneous H2 S-CO2 removal.

Technology Characteristics Industrial Use Reference

Azole-based protic ionic
Ionic liquid absorption No [66]
liquids
Ceramic-based No
Inorganic membranes [73]
Carbon molecular sieve No
Metal organic
Hybrid membrane No [67]
framework-polyimide mixed
Adsorption on pristine Molecular-sieve bases
Yes [26,68]
materials materials
Adsorption on Metal oxide/silica No
[26,68]
composite materials Metal oxide/activated carbon No

It is a normal practice in several waste locations that electrical power is produced by

burning the biogas produced in the same sites. Next, reference [74] investigated the desulfu-
rization of the biogas by coupling H2 S/CO2 absorption units coupled to a photobioreactor.
Total H2 S removal from the biogas was accomplished by the use of a bubble column or
airlift and under various operational conditions. Some aspects in relation to the removal of
CO2 make the use of bacteria-microalgae biocultures on these systems of interest.
Amine-based reactions and an industrial acid gas removal process were used to design
and simulate a gas cleaning process in [75]. The results indicated that the best results
are given by a mixture of piperazine and methyldiethanolamine, saving operational cost
and carbon emissions with respect to the use of the mixture of methyldiethanolamine
and diethanolamine.
The generation of biogas has different sources, vinasse being one of them. Different
alternatives are investigated for the elimination of water, CO2 , and H2 S from the biogas [76].
In practice, it has been demonstrated that the use of an anaerobic lagoon is preferred over
a series of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors, and from the various investigated
alternatives to clean the biogas, water is best removed by silica gel adsorption, and after,
both H2 S and CO2 are absorbed on an Fe/EDTA solution.
Amine groups bearing ionic liquids supported on membranes have been used
in the removal of CO2 and H2 S and separating both from methane [77]. Facilitated
transport is the mechanism responsible for CO2 transport using the ionic liquid [DMP-
DAH][Tf2N] (containing a primary amine), the gas transport being greatly dependent
on trans-membrane pressure.
In the simultaneous removal of both gases, apparently, absorption is the most used
technology with the greatest technology readiness level, alkaline salts and amine being
the most used absorbents; moreover, physical solvents are used in this absorption role.
Adsorption processing continues investigations in this field in order to improve adsorbents’
performance and/or creating new ones, allowing higher efficiencies in the removal of H2 S
and a complete regeneration to be used in further cycles. Both absorption and adsorption
technologies have a complete rationalization in their use, i.e., absorption in the treatment
of the most contaminated streams and adsorption to be used in the case of gases containing
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 10 of 14

low concentrations of the contaminants. The above technologies need the regeneration of
the adsorbent and the solvent; thus, they have intensive energy requirements [78].
The use of membranes needed a step ahead of pilot scale to show its potential in this
industrial issue [79]. Membranes incorporating inorganic materials into the membrane’s
polymeric structure are also of consideration to improve the removal of H2 S and CO2 . It is
shown in [80] that the presence of H2 S in the gas stream is detrimental for the membrane’s
performance, and this and other features make it so that, at the present time, membrane
usefulness is limited to laboratory or small pilot plants; further developments are needed
prior to use in commercial operations.
The use of a hybrid or intensified process used in other industries, i.e., membrane
contactor supplemented by other technology needing lower energy requirements, within
conventional separation processing is another possibility to benefit the separation of these
undesirable gases from gas streams. Under this point of view, H2 S oxidation, over carbon-
based catalysts, is a possibility to be used for the production of materials with a great
capacity to store energy [81].

4. Conclusions
The removal of H2 S is of the utmost importance in order to avoid negative conse-
quences such as exposure to humans and the overall environment. Though some of the
technologies know commercial scales, they are far from being perfect; thus, there is still a
wide margin for their improvement and optimization to gain further reduction in costs and
increase in the separation characteristics of the technology. When H2 S is present in the gas
stream, in the order of a few mg/L, adsorption with metal-oxide-based adsorbents is the
most used separation technology in the removal of this toxic gas, whereas this technology
together with absorption and membranes is used when there is a need to separate H2 S
from natural gas and when H2 S is present in the gas stream in the order of mol% levels.
Using membrane technologies, polymeric membranes are the most used material, whereas
in absorption processing alkanolamines are the preferable solvents for practical use. Future
investigations may be directed to the enhancement of the separation efficiency with respect
to H2 S, and this goal is focused on in the development of materials and solvents with
improved properties; the technologies to reach these expectations rely in better molecu-
lar design/grafting and the use of less expensive solvents and materials also fulfilling
environmental laws, i.e., adsorbents produced from wastes.
The simultaneous recovery of both H2 Sand CO2 is possible by the use of high-level
technology readiness carbon-capture operations; however, the selective removal of both
gases needed intensive investigations. This will help with the recovery and isolation of H2 S
and its further processing to different valuable products, including hydrogen and sulfur,
together with sulfur-containing composites/materials used in applications in relation to
the concept of the circular economy.
Table 7 summarizes advantages and disadvantages of the different H2 S removal
technologies, though, in the opinion of this author, a series of potential readers of this
manuscript will not agree with these and will add or void others.

Table 7. Advantages and disadvantages of the various H2 S removal technologies.

Technology Advantages Disadvantages

Established technology, possibility to treat Chemistry of alkanolamines, solvent
Absorption
tail gas regeneration seems difficult
Established technology, high Generation of toxic wastes, difficult to
Adsorption
removal capacity operate offshore, stability of the adsorbent
Possible limitations due to permeability,
Membranes and Modular configuration, large surface area
resistance due to membrane, degradation of
membrane contactors per unit volume
the membrane
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 11 of 14

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the CSIC Agency (Spain).
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Cui, G.; Bhat, S.A.; Li, W.; Ishiguro, Y.; Wei, Y.; Li, F. H2 S, MeSH, and NH3 emissions from activated sludge: An insight towards
sludge characteristics and microbial mechanisms. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2022, 166, 105331.
2. Han, Z.; Qi, F.; Li, R.; Wang, H.; Sun, D. Health impact of ordor from on-situ sewage sludge aerobic composting throughout
different seasons and during anaerobic digestion with hydrolysis pretreatment. Chemosphere 2020, 249, 126077.
3. Wang, Y.-C.; Han, M.-F.; Jia, T.-P.; Hu, X.-R.; Zhu, H.-Q.; Tong, Z.; Lin, Y.-T.; Wang, C.; Liu, D.-Z.; Peng, Y.-Z.; et al. Emissions,
measurement, and control of odor in livestock farms: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 776, 145735.
4. Konkol, D.; Popiela, E.; Skrzypczak, D.; Izydorczyk, G.; Mikula, K.; Moustakas, K.; Opaliński, S.; Korczyński, M.; Witek-Krowiak,
A.; Chojnacka, K. Recent innovations in various methods of harmful gases conversion and its mechanism in poultry farms.
Environ. Res. 2022, 21, 113825.
5. de Oliveira Carneiro, L.; de Vasconcelos, S.F.; de Farias Neto, G.W.; Brito, R.P.; Brito, K.D. Improving H2 S removal in the coke
oven gas purification process. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 257, 117862.
6. Lee, W.Y.; Park, S.Y.; Lee, K.B.; Nam, S.C. Simultaneous removal of CO2 and H2 S from biogas by blending amine adsorbents: A
performance comparison study. Energy Fuel. 2020, 34, 1992–2000.
7. Chan, Y.H.; Loh, S.K.; Chin, B.L.F.; Yiin, C.L.; How, B.S.; Cheah, K.W.; Wong, M.K.; Loy, A.C.M.; Gwee, Y.L.; Lo, S.L.Y.; et al.
Fractionation and extraction of bio-oil for production of greener fuel and value-added chemicals: Recent advances and future
prospects. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 397, 125406.
8. Tian, X.F.; Wang, L.M.; Zhang, P.; Fu, D.; Wang, Z.Y. A high efficient absorbent for the separation of H2 S from low partial pressure
coke oven gas. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 2021, 28, 5822–5832.
9. Wibowo, H.; Susanto, H.; Grisdanurak, N.; Hantoko, D.; Yoshikawa, K.; Qun, H.; Yan, M. Recent development of deep eutectic
solvent as absorbent for CO2 removal from syngas produced from gasification: Current status, challenges, and further research. J.
Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105439.
10. Wang, B.; Cheng, J.; Wang, D.; Li, X.; Meng, Q.; Zhang, Z.; An, J.; Liu, X.; Li, M. Study on the desulfurization and regeneration
performance of functional deep eutectic solvents. ACS Omega 2020, 5, 15353–15361.
11. Liu, X.; Wang, B.; Dong, X.; Qiu, Y.; Meng, Q. Enhancement effect of nanofluids on the desulfurization and regeneration
performance of ionic liquid-based system. J. Hazard Mater. 2021, 419, 126394.
12. Liu, X.; Wang, B.; Lv, X.; Meng, Q.; Li, M. Enhanced removal of hydrogen sulfide using novel nanofluid system composed of deep
eutectic solvent and Cu nanoparticles. J. Hazard Mater. 2021, 405, 124271.
13. Kang, J.-H.; Yoon, Y.; Song, J. Effects of pH on the simultaneous removal of hydrogen sulfide and ammonia in a combined
absorption and electro-oxidation system. J. Hazard Mater. 2020, 382, 121011.
14. Marín, D.; Vega, M.; Lebrero, R.; Muñoz, R. Optimization of a chemical scrubbing process based on a Fe-EDTA-carbonate based
solvent for the simultaneous removal of CO2 and H2 S from biogas. J. Water Proc. Eng. 2020, 37, 101476.
15. Zhan, J.; Wang, B.; Zhang, L.; Sun, B.-C.; Fu, J.; Chu, G.-w.; Zou, H. Simultaneous absorption of H2 S and CO2 into the MDEA +
PZ aqueous solution in a rotating packed bed. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 8295–8303.
16. Zhang, C.; Wang, X.; Liu, H.; Liu, C.; Li, S.; Xue, J.; Zeng, X. Development and application of modified lye for treating hydrogen
sulphide in coal mine. Fuel 2020, 269, 117233.
17. Mei, Y.; Dai, J.; Wang, X.; Nie, Y.; He, D. Novel low-temperature H2 S removal technology by developing yellow phosphorus and
phosphate rock slurry as absorbent. J. Hazard Mater. 2021, 413, 125386.
18. Alkhatib, I.I.I.; Ferreira, M.L.; Alba, C.G.; Bahamon, D.; Llovell, F.; Pereiro, A.B.; Araújo, J.M.M.; Abu-Zahra, M.R.M.; Vega, L.F.
Screening of ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents for physical CO2 absorption by Soft-SAFT using key performance indicators.
J. Chem. Eng. Data 2020, 65, 5844–5861.
19. Liu, X.; Wang, B.; Qiu, Y.; Dong, X.; Song, Y.; Meng, Q.; Li, M. Study on the desulfurization performance of iron/ethanolamine/deep
eutectic solvent system. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 2021, 28, 38026–38033.
20. Zhang, M.; Dong, B.; Wu, Y.; Hu, H.; Huang, H. Mechanism study on H2 S capture of ionic liquids based on triethylenetetramine
blended with ethylene glycol. J. Molec. Liq. 2022, 368, 120704.
21. Jafari, F.D.; Ameri, E. Effect of sodium dodecyl sulfate on CO2 and H2 S absorption enhancement of functionalized multiwall
carbon nanotubes in water: Experimental study and empirical model. Arabian J. Chem. 2022, 15, 104314.
22. Askari, M.; Salehi, E.; Baluchi, A. Intensification of hydrogen sulfide absorption by diethanolamine in industrial scale via
combined simulation and data-based optimization strategies. Chem. Eng. Res. Design 2022, 188, 545–554.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 12 of 14

23. Abdi, J.; Hadipoor, M.; Esmaeili-Faraj, S.H.; Vaferi, B. A modeling approach for estimating hydrogen sulfide solubility in fifteen
different imidazole-based ionic liquids. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 4415.
24. Abotaleb, A.; Gladich, I.; Alkhateeb, A.; Mardini, N.; Bicer, Y.; Sinopoli, A. Chemical and physical systems for sour gas removal:
An overview from reaction mechanisms to industrial implications. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2022, 10, 104755.
25. Qiu, K.; Liu, Z.; Dong, Y.; Liu, L.; Li, W.; Niu, S.; Jin, Z. [Bmim]FeCl4 efficient catalytic oxidative removal of H2 S by Cu2+
synergistic reinforcement. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2022, 45, 1867–1875.
26. Georgiadis, A.G.; Charisiou, N.D.; Goula, M.A. Removal of hydrogen sulfide from various industrial gases: A review of the most
promising adsorbing materials. Catalysts 2020, 10, 521.
27. Florent, M.; Bandosz, T.J. Surfactant-modified biosolid-derived materials as efficient H2 S removal media: Synergistic effects of
carbon phase properties and inorganic phase chemistry on reactive adsorption. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 401, 125986.
28. Hassankiadeh, M.N.; Hallajisani, A. Application of molybdenum oxide nanoparticles in H2 S removal from natural gas under
different operational and geometrical conditions. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2020, 190, 107131.
29. Jafari, M.J.; Zendehdel, R.; Rafieepour, A.; Pour, M.N.; Irvani, H.; Khodakarim, S. Comparison of Y and ZSM-5 zeolite modified
with magnetite nanoparticles in removal of hydrogen sulfide from air. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 17, 187–194.
30. Mao, J.; Ma, Y.; Zang, L.; Xue, R.; Xiao, C.; Ji, D. Efficient adsorption of hydrogen sulfide at room temperature using fumed
silica-supported deep eutectic solvents. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 2020, 20, 203–215.
31. Nicolae, S.A.; Szilágyi, P.Á.; Titirici, M.M. Soft templating production of porous carbon adsorbents for CO2 and H2 S capture.
Carbon 2020, 169, 193–204.
32. Ahmadi, R.; Alivand, M.S.; Tehrani, N.H.M.H.; Ardjmand, M.; Rashidi, A.; Rafizadeh, M.; Seif, A.; Mollakazemi, F.; Noorpoor, Z.;
Rudd, J. Preparation of fiber-like nanoporous carbon from jute thread waste for superior CO2 and H2 S removal from natural gas:
Experimental and DFT stusdy. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 415, 129076.
33. Wang, Y.; Ning, P.; Zhao, R.; Li, K.; Wang, C.; Sun, X.; Song, X.; Lin, Q. A Cu modified active carbon fiber significantly promoted
H2 S and PH3 simultaneous removal at a low reaction temperature. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2021, 15, 132.
34. Wang, S.; Nam, H.; Nam, H. Preparation of activated carbon from peanut shell with KOH activation and its application for H2 S
adsorption in confined space. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 103683.
35. Gasquet, V.; Kim, B.; Sigot, L.; Benbelkacem, H. H2 S adsorption from biogas with thermal treatment residues. Waste Biomass
Valorization. 2020, 11, 5363–5373.
36. Zhao, C.; Wang, B.; Theng, B.K.G.; Wu, P.; Liu, F.; Wang, S.; Lee, X.; Chen, M.; Li, L.; Zhang, X. Formation and mechanisms of
nano-metal oxide-biochar composites for pollutants removal: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 767, 145305.
37. Kozyatnyk, I.; Yacout, D.M.M.; Caneghem, J.V.; Jansson, S. Comparative environmental assessment of end-of-life carbonaceous
water treatment adsorbents. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 302, 122866.
38. Nowrouzi, M.; Abyar, H.; Younesi, H.; Khaki, E. Life cycle environmental and economic assessment of highly efficient carbon-
based CO2 adsorbents: A comparative study. J. CO2 Util. 2021, 47, 101491.
39. Izhar, T.N.T.; Kee, G.Z.; Saad, F.N.M.; Rahim, S.Z.A.; Zakarya, I.A.; Besom, M.R.C.; Ib, M.; Syafiuddin, A. Adsorption of hydrogen
sulfide (H2 S) from municipal solid waste by using biochars. Bioint. Res. Appl. Chem. 2022, 12, 8057–8069.
40. Alguacil, F.J.; Alonso, M.A.; Lopez, F.A.; Robla, J.I. Dynamic adsorption of H2 S onto a goethite-based material. Molecules 2022, 27, 7983.
41. Cai, X.; Yang, Q.; Tong, Y.; Wang, M.; Zhang, S. Metal-modified s-C3N6 as a potential superior sensing medium for effective
capture of toxic waste gases CO, H2 S and SO2 in the iron and steel industry based on first-principles investigations. Appl. Surf.
Sc. 2022, 606, 154947.
42. Cheng, W.-Y.; Chang, C.-R.; Fuh, H.-R. First principles study of NH3 , H2 S, Cl2 , and C2 H2 gases adsorption on defective GaSe
monolayer. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2022, 606, 154722.
43. Xu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Ma, C.; Qiao, W.; Wang, J.; Ling, L. Functionalization of activated carbon fiber mat with bimetallic active sites for
NH3 and H2 S adsorption at room temperature. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 303, 122335.
44. Juntarachat, N.; Onthong, U. Removal of hydrogen sulfide from biogas using banana peel and banana empty fruit bunch biochars
as alternative adsorbents. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2022. [CrossRef]
45. Zhao, Y.; Liu, Y. Preparation of hydrogen sulfide adsorbent derived from spent Fenton-like reagent modified biochar and its
removal characteristics for hydrogen sulfide. Fuel Proc. Technol. 2022, 238, 107495.
46. Cui, S.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Pan, J. Preparation of copper-based biochar adsorbent with outstanding H2 S adsorption capacity and
study on H2 S removal. J. Energy Inst. 2022, 105, 481–490.
47. He, X.; Kumakiri, I.; Hillestad, M. Conceptual process design and simulation of membrane systems for integrated natural gas
dehydration and sweetening. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020, 247, 116993.
48. Shi, Y.; Liang, B.; Lin, R.-B.; Zhang, C.; Chen, B. Gas separation via hybrid metalorganic framework/polymer membranes. Trends
Chem. 2020, 2, 254–269.
49. Han, Y.; Ho, W.S.W. Polymeric membranes for CO2 separation and capture. J. Membr. Sci. 2021, 628, 119244.
50. Valappil, R.S.K.; Ghasem, N.; Al-Marzouqi, M. Current and future trends in polymer membrane-based gas separation technology:
A comprehensive review. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2021, 98, 103–129.
51. Yong, W.F.; Zhang, H. Recent advances in polymer blend membranes for gas separation and pervaporation. Prog. Mater. Sci.
2021, 116, 100713.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 13 of 14

52. Liu, Y.; Liu, Z.; Morisato, A.; Bhuwania, N.; Chinn, D.; Koros, W.J. Natural gas sweetening using a cellulose triacetate hollow fiber
membrane illustrating controlled plasticization benefits. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 601, 117910.
53. Liu, Y.; Liu, Z.; Liu, G.; Qiu, W.; Bhuwania, N.; Chinn, D.; Koros, W.J. Surprising plasticization benefits in natural gas upgrading
using polyimide membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 593, 117430.
54. Harrigan, D.J.; Lawrence, J.A.; Reid, H.W.; Rivers, J.B.; O’Brien, J.T.; Sharber, S.A.; Sundell, B.J. Tunable sour gas separations:
Simultaneous H2 S and CO2 removal from natural gas via crosslinked telechelic poly(ethylene glycol) membranes. J. Membr. Sci.
2020, 602, 117947.
55. Lawrence, J.A.; Harrigan, D.J.; Maroon, C.R.; Sharber, S.A.; Long, B.K.; Sundell, B.J. Promoting acid gas separations via strategic
alkoxysilyl substitution of vinyladded poly(norbornene)s. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 616, 118569.
56. Yahaya, G.O.; Hayek, A.; Alsamah, A.; Shalabi, Y.A.; Sultan, M.M.B.; Alhajry, R.H. Copolyimide membranes with improved
H2 S/CH4 selectivity for high-pressure sour mixed-gas separation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 272, 118897.
57. Shamsabadi, A.A.; Rezakazemi, M.; Seidi, F.; Riazi, H.; Aminabhavi, T.; Soroush, M. Next generation polymers of intrinsic
microporosity with tunable moieties for ultrahigh permeation and precise molecular CO2 separation. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci.
2021, 84, 100903.
58. Chuah, C.Y.; Kim, K.; Lee, J.; Koh, D.-Y.; Bae, T.-H. CO2 absorption using membrane contactors: Recent progress and future
perspective. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 6773–6794.
59. Pang, H.; Chen, Z.; Gong, H.; Du, M. Fabrication of a super hydrophobic polyvinylidene fluoride-hexadecyltrimethoxysilane
hybrid membrane for carbon dioxide absorption in a membrane contactor. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 595, 117536.
60. Zhang, H.; Xue, K.; Cheng, C.; Gao, D.; Chen, H. Study on the performance of CO2 capture from flue gas with ceramic membrane
contactor. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 265, 118521.
61. Signorini, V.; Giacinti Baschetti, M.; Pizzi, D.; Merlo, L. Permeation of ternary mixture containing H2 S, CO2 and CH4 in Aquivion®
perfluorosulfonic acid (PFSA) ionomer membranes. Membranes 2022, 12, 1034.
62. Das, J.; Lens, P.N.L. Resilience of hollow fibre membrane bioreactors for treating H2 S under steady state and transient conditions.
Chemosphere 2022, 307, 136142.
63. Das, J.; Nolan, S.; Lens, P.N.L. Simultaneous removal of H2 and NH3 from raw biogas in hollow fibre membrane bioreactors.
Environ. Technol. Innov. 2022, 28, 102777.
64. Li, Y.; Li, F.; Zheng, M.; Yan, H.; Liu, Q. H2 S adsorption performance of alkali lignocarbon/PVA composite membrane. Korean J.
Chem. Eng. 2022, 39, 2368–2378.
65. Ma, Y.; Liao, Y.; Su, Y.; Wang, B.; Yang, Y.; Ji, D.; Li, H.; Zhou, H.; Wang, D. Comparative investigation of different CO2 capture
technologies for coal to ethylene glycol process. Processes 2021, 9, 207.
66. Zhang, X.; Xiong, W.; Peng, L.; Wu, Y.; Hu, X. Highly selective absorption separation of H2 S and CO2 from CH4 by novel
azole-based protic ionic liquids. AIChE J. 2020, 66, 16936.
67. Ahmad, M.Z.; Peters, T.A.; Konnertz, N.M.; Visser, T.; T’ellez, C.; Coronas, J.; Fila, V.; de Vos, W.M.; Benes, N.E. High-pressure
CO2 /CH4 separation of Zr-MOFs based mixed matrix membranes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020, 230, 115858.
68. Liu, D.; Li, B.; Wu, J.; Liu, Y. Sorbents for hydrogen sulfide capture from biogas at low temperature: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett.
2020, 18, 113–128.
69. Huertas, J.K.; Quipuzco, L.; Hassanein, A.; Lansing, S. Comparing hydrogen sulfide removal efficiency in a field-scale digester
using microaeration and iron filters. Energies 2020, 13, 4793.
70. Shaikh, A.R.; Posada-Pérez, S.; Brotons-Rufes, A.; Pajski, J.J.; Vajiha Kumar, G.; Mateen, A.; Poater, A.; Solà, M.; Chawla, M.;
Cavallo, L. Selective absorption of H2 S and CO2 by azole based protic ionic liquids: A combined density functional theory and
molecular dynamics study. J. Molec. Liq. 2022, 367, 120558.
71. Raksajati, A.; Purwanto, H.K.; Baskoro, A.N.; Indarto, A.; Ariono, D. Selective H2 S absorption using the mixture of NaOH-
NaHCO3 -Na2 CO3 buffer solvent solution. J. Eng. Technol. Sci. 2022, 54, 220513.
72. Xue, J.; Yang, C.; Fu, J.; He, J.; Li, J. Research and performance evaluation on selective absorption of H2 S from gas mixtures by
using secondary alkanolamines. Processes 2022, 10, 1795.
73. Makertihartha, I.G.B.N.; Kencana, K.S.; Dwiputra, T.R.; Khoiruddin, K.; Lugito, G.; Mukti, R.R.; Wenten, I.G. SAPO-34 zeotype
membrane for gas sweetening. Rev. Chem. Eng. 2022, 38, 431–450.
74. Rocher-Rivas, R.; González-Sánchez, A.; Ulloa-Mercado, G.; Muñoz, R.; Quijano, G. Biogas desulfurization and calorific value
enhancement in compact H2 S/CO2 absorption units coupled to a photobioreactor. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 108336.
75. Agarwal, N.; Nhien, L.C.; Lee, M. Rate-based modeling and assessment of an amine-based acid gas removal process through a
comprehensive solvent selection procedure. Energies 2022, 15, 6817.
76. Moreira, L.C.; Borges, P.O.; Cavalcante, R.M.; Young, A.F. Simulation and economic evaluation of process alternatives for biogas
production and purification from sugarcane vinasse. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2022, 163, 112532.
77. Peng, L.; Shi, M.; Zhang, X.; Xiong, W.; Hu, X.; Tu, Z.; Wu, Y. Facilitated transport separation of CO2 and H2 S by supported liquid
membrane based on task-specific protic ionic liquids. Green Chem. Eng. 2022, 3, 259–266.
78. Elfving, J.; Kauppinen, J.; Jegoroff, M.; Ruuskanen, V.; J¨arvinen, L.; Sainio, T. Experimental comparison of regeneration methods
for CO2 concentration from air using amine-based adsorbent. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 404, 126337.
79. Hafeez, S.; Safdar, T.; Pallari, E.; Manos, G.; Aristodemou, E.; Zhang, Z.; Al-Salem, S.M.; Constantinou, A. CO2 capture using
membrane contactors: A systematic literature review. Front. Chem. Sci. Eng. 2021, 15, 720–754.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3217 14 of 14

80. Nemestóthy, N.; Bakonyi, P.; Lajtai-Szabó, P.; Bélafi-Bakó, K. The impact of various natural gas contaminant exposures on
CO2 /CH4 separation by a polyimide membrane. Membranes 2020, 10, 324.
81. Sun, M.-H.; Wang, X.-Z.; Zhao, Z.-B.; Qiu, J.-S. Review of H2 S selective oxidation over carbon-based materials at low temperature:
From pollutant to energy storage materials. N. Carbon Mater. 2022, 37, 675–694.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.