Hubbry Logo
Castner–Kellner processCastner–Kellner processMain
Open search
Castner–Kellner process
Community hub
Castner–Kellner process
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Castner–Kellner process
Castner–Kellner process
Castner–Kellner process
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Castner–Kellner process is a method of electrolysis on an aqueous alkali chloride solution (usually sodium chloride solution) to produce the corresponding alkali hydroxide,[1] invented by American Hamilton Castner and Austrian Carl Kellner in the 1890s.[2][3] It is a type of chloralkali process, but in this role it is gradually being replaced by membrane electrolysis which has lower energy cost and fewer environmental concerns.[4]

History

[edit]

The first patent for electrolyzing brine was granted in England in 1851 to Charles Watt. His process was not an economically feasible method for producing sodium hydroxide though because it could not prevent the chlorine that formed in the brine solution from reacting with its other constituents. American chemist and engineer, Hamilton Castner, solved the mixing problem with the invention of the mercury cell and was granted a U.S. patent in 1894.[5] Austrian chemist, Carl Kellner arrived at a similar solution at about the same time. In order to avoid a legal battle they became partners in 1895, founding the Castner-Kellner Alkali Company, which built plants employing the process throughout Europe. The mercury cell process continues in use to this day.[6] Current-day mercury cell plant operations are criticized for environmental release of mercury[7] leading in some cases to severe mercury poisoning (as occurred in Japan). Due to these concerns, mercury cell plants are being phased out, and a sustained effort is being made to reduce mercury emissions from existing plants.[8]

Process details

[edit]
Castner–Kellner apparatus

The apparatus shown is divided into two types of cells separated by slate walls. The first type, shown on the right and left of the diagram, uses an electrolyte of sodium chloride solution, a graphite anode (A), and a mercury cathode (M). The other type of cell, shown in the center of the diagram, uses an electrolyte of sodium hydroxide solution, a mercury anode (M), and an iron cathode (D). The mercury electrode is common between the two cells. This is achieved by having the walls separating the cells dip below the level of the electrolytes but still allow the mercury to flow beneath them.[9]

The reaction at anode (A) is:

2 Cl− → Cl2 + 2 e−

The chlorine gas that results vents at the top of the outside cells where it is collected as a byproduct of the process. The reaction at the mercury cathode in the outer cells is

Na+ + e− → Na (amalgam)

The sodium metal formed by this reaction dissolves in the mercury to form an amalgam. The mercury conducts the current from the outside cells to the center cell. In addition, a rocking mechanism (B shown by fulcrum on the left and rotating eccentric on the right) agitates the mercury to transport the dissolved sodium metal from the outside cells to the center cell.

The anode reaction in the center cell takes place at the interface between the mercury and the sodium hydroxide solution.

2Na (amalgam) → 2Na+ + 2e−

Finally at the iron cathode (D) of the center cell the reaction is

2H2O + 2e− → 2OH− + H2

The net effect is that the concentration of sodium chloride in the outside cells decreases and the concentration of sodium hydroxide in the center cell increases. As the process continues, some sodium hydroxide solution is withdrawn from center cell as output product and is replaced with water. Sodium chloride is added to the outside cells to replace what has been electrolyzed.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Castner–Kellner process

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Castner–Kellner process is an electrolytic method for producing sodium hydroxide and chlorine gas from aqueous sodium chloride brine, utilizing a mercury cathode to form a sodium amalgam that avoids contamination of the alkali product.
In the process, electrolysis occurs with the anode submerged in brine where chloride ions oxidize to chlorine gas, while at the mercury cathode, sodium ions reduce to form a sodium-mercury amalgam; this amalgam is then reacted with water in a separate decomposer to liberate pure sodium hydroxide solution and hydrogen gas, regenerating the mercury for recirculation.
Developed through patents by Hamilton Castner in England (1892) for a rocking mercury cell and concurrently by Carl Kellner in Austria, the process was commercialized by the Castner-Kellner Company from 1895 onward, enabling high-purity caustic soda production vital for industries like soap-making and paper manufacturing.
Despite its advantage in yielding uncontaminated sodium hydroxide without hypochlorite or chlorate byproducts, the process requires higher energy input (approximately 3400 kWh per ton of chlorine) compared to alternatives and has drawn significant criticism for mercury emissions, leading to environmental mercury pollution and health risks such as poisoning, prompting its global phase-out in favor of membrane and diaphragm cells.

Historical Development

Invention and Key Patents

The Castner–Kellner process emerged from parallel inventions in 1892 by Hamilton Young Castner, an American born in 1858, and Karl Kellner, an Austrian , who each developed an using a mercury to produce and from solutions. Castner's design addressed limitations in prior electrolysis methods, such as inefficient separation of products and contamination, by employing flowing mercury as the cathode to form a , which was subsequently decomposed in a separate compartment to isolate high-purity caustic soda. Kellner's contemporaneous work featured a similar mercury-based configuration, emphasizing continuous amalgam flow to mitigate issues like formation and uneven current distribution observed in static cells. Upon filing their respective patents in 1892, Castner and Kellner discovered the substantial overlap in their technologies during reviews, prompting them to negotiate a cross-licensing agreement rather than litigate, which enabled joint commercialization under the Castner-Kellner Company formed in 1895. Castner's primary patent for the mercury cell was issued that year, detailing the apparatus with a horizontal mercury pool and anodes, while Kellner's Austrian and subsequent international filings, including U.S. No. 586,729 granted in 1897, refined aspects like apparatus and amalgam handling. This pooling of facilitated the first demonstration plant, a 550-ampere Castner cell installation, which validated the 's viability for industrial-scale production of and without the inefficiencies of earlier diaphragm or direct methods.

Early Commercial Adoption

The Castner–Kellner process achieved its initial commercial implementation in 1895 when the Mathieson Alkali Company licensed the technology and commenced small-scale production of caustic soda and bleaching powder at its facility, leveraging local salt, coal, and limestone resources. This marked one of the earliest industrial applications of mercury-cell electrolysis for chlor-alkali production in the United States, transitioning from prior methods like the . In the same year, Hamilton Castner and Karl Kellner resolved patent disputes by partnering to form the Castner-Kellner Alkali Company, which focused on licensing and deploying the process globally. The company established its first major plant at Weston Point, , , initiating large-scale production of and caustic soda in 1897. This facility represented a significant advancement in electrolytic capacity, producing approximately 10 tons of caustic soda per day initially through multiple cells. Licensing agreements facilitated rapid proliferation, with the process adopted in and due to its advantages in product purity and co-production of . By 1900, more than 30 commercial installations operated worldwide, supplanting less efficient predecessors in regions with access to hydroelectric power and sources.

Expansion in the Early 20th Century

In 1902, the Castner-Kellner works at Weston Point, Runcorn, , discontinued the installation of original rocking mercury cells, transitioning subsequent expansions to stationary long mercury cells adapted from Solvay designs, which offered improved reliability and capacity for large-scale continuous operation. This modification addressed limitations in the earlier rocking mechanism, enabling higher throughput and reducing maintenance demands in industrial settings. The company's growth accelerated with the opening of new facilities, including electrolytic alkali works at Wallsend-on-Tyne in 1907, which extended production of caustic soda, , and related products beyond the primary site. By around 1914, the Castner-Kellner Alkali Company had developed into a medium-sized operation, supported by British capital and leveraging by-product hydrogen for emerging processes like synthesis pilot plants at Weston Point in 1921. Strategic mergers further propelled expansion; a 1916 share exchange allied the company with Brunner, Mond & Co., facilitating resource sharing and market integration, followed by full acquisition in 1920, which consolidated operations under larger chemical conglomerates. In the United States, licensees like Mathieson Alkali Works, operational since 1897 at sites including and , contributed to parallel growth, with the process underpinning much of the early electrolytic chlor-alkali output amid rising demand for pure in industries such as and manufacturing. This period marked the process's peak commercial dominance in and before competition from diaphragm cells intensified in the and .

Process Mechanism

Cell Configuration and Materials

The Castner–Kellner electrolytic cell consists of a shallow, horizontal trough serving as the electrolysis compartment, where a thin layer of liquid mercury acts as the flowing cathode along the inclined bottom. A saturated aqueous () electrolyte is maintained above the mercury layer, with anodes suspended or positioned within the brine to enable chlorine gas evolution at the anode surface. The cell body is constructed from corrosion-resistant materials, typically rubber-lined mild for the side walls and or rubber/plastic-lined bases, designed to withstand the alkaline and environments while facilitating mercury flow by along the incline. Mercury is introduced at the higher end of the cell, flows countercurrent to the brine circulation, and collects sodium to form amalgam before exiting to an adjacent decomposer section. Early implementations, such as the rocking cell variant patented by Hamilton Castner and operational from 1897, featured mechanical rocking motion to agitate the mercury-brine interface and improve , with a capacity rated at 550 amperes. Subsequent designs evolved to continuous-flow configurations without rocking, relying on the streaming mercury for efficient sodium formation, while anodes were selected for their stability in chloride evolution despite gradual wear. The decomposer, often integrated or adjacent, employs grids to enhance for amalgam , with mercury recycled via centrifugal pumps back to the cell inlet.

Electrochemical Reactions

The electrochemical reactions in the Castner-Kellner process occur during the of saturated aqueous () in a cell featuring a flowing mercury and inert anodes, typically or later coated with mixed metal oxides. At the , oxidation of ions produces gas according to the half-reaction:
2Cl−→Cl2+2e−2Cl^- \rightarrow Cl_2 + 2e^-
This reaction proceeds with a standard potential of approximately +1.36 V versus the , though overpotentials and cell conditions influence the actual voltage. At the cathode, sodium ions are reduced and dissolve into the mercury to form a sodium-mercury amalgam, governed by:
Na++e−+Hg→Na(Hg)Na^+ + e^- + Hg \rightarrow Na(Hg)
The amalgam formation shifts the reduction potential to about -1.8 V, enabling selective sodium deposition over evolution from , which would otherwise dominate due to the more favorable potential of reduction (-0.83 V at 7). This selectivity arises from the low solubility of sodium in mercury and the high hydrogen on mercury surfaces, minimizing side reactions and ensuring high current efficiency, often exceeding 90% for sodium production. The overall cell reaction, combining anode and cathode processes, is:
2Na++2Cl−→2Na(Hg)+Cl22Na^+ + 2Cl^- \rightarrow 2Na(Hg) + Cl_2
Direct NaOH formation does not occur in the ; instead, the amalgam is transported to a separate for reaction with water. The electrolytic reactions require a cell voltage of 4.0 to 4.5 V, driven by external power, with energy consumption typically around 3,200 to 3,400 kWh per metric ton of Cl2 produced, reflecting inefficiencies from overpotentials and ohmic losses.

Amalgam Decomposition and Product Separation

The , containing approximately 0.2–0.5% sodium by weight, flows under gravity from the to a dedicated , often a horizontal trough or tank made of , iron, or lead-lined materials to resist . In this unit, the amalgam reacts chemically with a controlled volume of or dilute caustic liquor, without applied , yielding an exothermic decomposition governed by the reaction: 2Na(Hg)+2H2O→2NaOH+H2+2Hg2\mathrm{Na(Hg)} + 2\mathrm{H_2O} \rightarrow 2\mathrm{NaOH} + \mathrm{H_2} + 2\mathrm{Hg}. This process liberates hydrogen gas at the amalgam-water interface, driven by the reduced activity of sodium in mercury (far below that of pure sodium metal), which prevents explosive reactivity while enabling efficient breakdown. Hydrogen evolves as bubbles, which are vented or collected separately for potential use as , while the nascent NaOH forms a dilute (typically 10–12% concentration initially). The released mercury, now largely depleted of sodium, separates from the aqueous phase due to its higher (13.5 g/cm³ versus ~1 g/cm³ for the NaOH solution), at the bottom of the decomposer. This gravity-driven stratification allows the purified mercury to flow back to the via a U-shaped trap or conduit, minimizing sodium carryover and maintaining process continuity; decomposers are positioned alongside or below the cells to facilitate this recirculation without pumps. The NaOH-rich liquor overflows or is decanted from the decomposer for further concentration via , achieving 50% purity suitable for commercial sale, while trace (often <0.1 ppm in modern designs) is managed through settling tanks or filtration to prevent product impurities. Operational parameters, such as water addition rate and temperature control (typically 60–80°C to optimize reaction kinetics without excessive foaming), ensure high mercury recovery (>99%) and minimize amalgam buildup, though periodic cleaning addresses any iron or erosion contributing to impurities. This separation step's efficiency underpins the process's high-purity NaOH output compared to diaphragm cells, albeit at the cost of mercury handling.

Operational Characteristics

Energy Requirements and Efficiency

The Castner–Kellner process demands substantial electrical for , primarily due to the elevated cell voltage required for formation at the mercury , which operates at approximately 4.0 to 4.5 volts per cell—higher than the theoretical voltage of about 2.2 volts for brine . This results in typical power consumption of around 3,700 kWh per metric ton of produced, equivalent to roughly 3,300 kWh per metric ton of when accounting for stoichiometric yields of approximately 1.13 tons of NaOH per ton of Cl₂. The amalgam step in a separate denuder cell adds minor additional for agitation and addition but is dwarfed by electrolytic demands, with overall limited by ohmic losses from mercury circulation and overpotentials. Current efficiency in mercury cells reaches 95–98%, reflecting effective prevention of evolution via amalgam reduction of sodium ions, yet voltage efficiency remains lower at 50–60% owing to the thermodynamic penalty of amalgam stability (requiring extra potential to reduce Na⁺ to Na(Hg) rather than H₂). Total energy efficiency thus hovers around 50–55%, with losses exacerbated by internal cell resistance from the flowing mercury and gas disengagement. Historical operational data from early 20th-century plants indicate variability based on (typically 0.5–1.0 kA/m²) and (80–90°C), where higher densities increased output but proportionally raised use without proportional efficiency gains due to rising overpotentials. Compared to contemporaneous diaphragm cells, the Castner–Kellner method exhibited 10–20% higher , attributable to the dual-stage process and mercury's conductivity trade-offs, though it avoided back-migration losses common in porous diaphragms. This inefficiency contributed to its gradual phase-out by the mid-20th century in favor of processes with lower voltage penalties, despite the mercury cell's superior product purity. Optimization attempts, such as refined mercury flow rates and improvements, yielded marginal reductions (e.g., 5–10% via better coatings), but fundamental electrochemical constraints persisted.

Scale and Production Capacity

The Castner–Kellner process enabled industrial-scale production of and from the late 1890s onward, transitioning chlor-alkali manufacturing from laboratory demonstrations to commercial viability. Initial implementations featured modest capacities but rapidly expanded with improvements in cell design and power supply. For instance, the Castner-Kellner Alkali Company's facility in , , commenced mercury cell operations in 1897 and reached an annual output of approximately 3,000 tons by 1900. Concurrently, the Mathieson Alkali Works in , initiated production in 1898 using Castner cells powered by 2,000 horsepower, yielding an estimated capacity of about 3,600 metric tons of per year, calculated from the process's of roughly 3,600 kWh per ton of . By 1900, the process had proliferated globally, with more than 30 electrolytic plants operational in , , and elsewhere, collectively boosting chlor-alkali output to meet rising demand for bleaches, disinfectants, and chemicals. Early plants typically operated dozens of cells in parallel, with individual cell outputs on the order of several kilograms of per day, scalable through modular additions. Over the early , refinements such as longer mercury troughs and higher current densities allowed facilities to grow into multi-thousand-ton annual producers, dominating global capacity until the mid-1900s when environmental concerns prompted phase-out. Peak mercury cell installations, evolved from the original Castner–Kellner design, supported plants with capacities exceeding 100,000 tons of annually by the mid-20th century, though specific attributions to unmodified early variants diminish post-1920s.

Advantages Over Contemporaneous Methods

Purity of Outputs

The Castner–Kellner process, a mercury cell electrolysis method, yields sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) solution at a concentration of approximately 50% by weight, with exceptionally low contamination levels, typically featuring sodium chloride impurities below 30 parts per million (ppm). This high purity arises from the separation of the cathode reaction—forming sodium amalgam rather than direct alkali metal deposition in the electrolyte—and subsequent decomposition of the amalgam in a mercury-free water compartment, which minimizes chloride ion carryover into the final product. In contrast to diaphragm cell processes, where salt content in the caustic soda often exceeds 1%, the mercury cell's design enables direct production of a grade suitable for demanding applications like rayon manufacturing without additional purification steps. Chlorine gas evolved at the anode compartment achieves high purity, generally exceeding 99.5%, due to the controlled electrolysis of purified brine and the absence of cathode product mixing, allowing collection of dry Cl2 with minimal oxygen or moisture impurities. The process's graphite or later dimensionally stable anodes facilitate efficient chloride oxidation, reducing side reactions that could introduce contaminants like hypochlorite or chlorate. Hydrogen gas, produced during amalgam decomposition, emerges with purity levels suitable for industrial use, typically above 99%, as the reaction occurs in a dedicated decomposer isolated from electrolytic byproducts. These output purities contributed to the process's commercial viability in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, enabling high-value chemical syntheses that required low-impurity feedstocks, though trace mercury contamination in products—arising from amalgam inefficiencies—necessitated monitoring and has since driven phase-outs in favor of non-mercurial alternatives.

Reliability in Industrial Settings

The Castner–Kellner process exhibited strong operational reliability in industrial applications, enabling stable, continuous with minimal interruptions when gaps were properly maintained to prevent short-circuiting. Integrated controls for current, voltage, and positioning further enhanced uptime by automating adjustments and reducing manual interventions. Cells supported variable loading down to 30% of full capacity, offering flexibility for plants facing supply fluctuations, a capability less pronounced in diaphragm cells of the era. Equipment durability contributed significantly to its industrial dependability, with mercury cells engineered for 40–60 year lifespans and anodes lasting 4–8 years under standard conditions. Maintenance protocols, including optimized mercury flow and purity management, extended operational intervals by limiting cell openings to once every 2–3 years, far surpassing the frequent diaphragm replacements (every 1–5 years) required in contemporaneous Griesheim-type processes. This reduced workforce needs and downtime, supporting economic viability in large-scale facilities like the Castner-Kellner works established near in the 1890s. Historically, these attributes underpinned the process's preference over diaphragm methods for consistent high-purity output without extensive post-treatment, as evidenced by its 55% share of Western European chlor-alkali capacity as late as 2000. While mercury recirculation added handling complexity, rigorous housekeeping minimized associated risks, affirming the system's robustness for prolonged industrial deployment until phased out for environmental reasons.

Criticisms and Limitations

Technical Drawbacks

The Castner–Kellner process operates at a higher cell voltage, typically around 4.2–4.5 V, compared to approximately 3.5 V in diaphragm cells, primarily due to ohmic losses from the thin mercury layer and the kinetics of amalgam formation at the cathode. This elevated voltage arises from the need to maintain mercury flow and the overpotential associated with sodium ion reduction to amalgam rather than direct hydrogen evolution, contributing to inherent inefficiencies in electron transfer. The flowing mercury cathode demands precise for continuous circulation, often via gravity or pumps in horizontal or vertical cell designs, to ensure uniform contact with the and prevent localized pooling or stagnation. Disruptions in mercury flow can shift the cathode reaction toward gas evolution instead of amalgam production, reducing current efficiency below 95–97% and necessitating frequent adjustments or shutdowns. Additionally, the process's sensitivity to brine impurities, such as traces of or calcium, can poison the mercury surface by forming stable amalgams or precipitates, impairing cathode performance and requiring rigorous pretreatment protocols. Amalgam decomposition in a separate reactor introduces further technical challenges, as the exothermic reaction between sodium amalgam and water must be controlled to avoid excessive hydrogen overproduction or incomplete sodium extraction, which could result in variable caustic soda concentrations (typically 48–50% NaOH). Graphite contactors or grids in the decomposer degrade over time under the corrosive environment, leading to increased resistance and potential short-circuiting. High current densities, often exceeding 10 kA/m², generate intense electromagnetic fields that interfere with instrumentation and require specialized shielding for nearby control systems. Overall, these factors limit scalability and operational flexibility compared to later designs, with cell current densities constrained by mercury viscosity and flow dynamics.

Economic Factors

The Castner–Kellner process offered economic advantages in its era by enabling the production of high-purity sodium hydroxide without the salt contamination inherent in early diaphragm methods, allowing producers to command premium prices for applications requiring uncontaminated caustic soda, such as rayon manufacturing and soap production. This purity reduced downstream purification costs compared to diaphragm cells, which necessitated energy-intensive evaporation steps to concentrate and desalt the output. However, these benefits were offset by elevated operational expenses, including electricity consumption of approximately 3,000–3,400 kWh per metric ton of chlorine produced, higher than the 2,500 kWh per ton typical of diaphragm cells. Mercury handling imposed further costs, as facilities experienced ongoing losses—estimated at several kilograms per cell annually—necessitating replenishment of this expensive metal, with global replacement demands adding significantly to maintenance budgets. Capital investments were substantial due to the specialized infrastructure for flowing mercury cathodes, amalgam decomposers, and safety measures, though exact historical figures vary; for instance, early 20th-century installations required robust corrosion-resistant materials and precise flow controls that exceeded those of simpler diaphragm setups. In comparison to contemporaneous methods, the process's reliability in large-scale operations justified adoption in regions with cheap hydroelectric power, such as plants established around 1895, where low energy tariffs mitigated some inefficiencies. By the mid-20th century, rising energy prices and mercury's volatility eroded profitability, with operational costs for mercury cells exceeding those of improved diaphragm processes by 20–30% in alone under typical industrial conditions. Economic analyses of chlor-alkali transitions highlight that while initial setups recouped investments through output quality, long-term disadvantages— including mercury procurement amid supply constraints and higher for cell refurbishment—contributed to gradual phase-out even before stringent regulations, as alternatives offered better margins.

Environmental Impacts

Mercury Contamination Mechanisms

In the Castner–Kellner process, mercury functions as the liquid in electrolytic cells, where it amalgamates with sodium ions reduced during , forming a sodium-mercury amalgam that is subsequently decomposed to yield . Mercury losses primarily occur through volatilization, as elemental mercury vapor (Hg⁰) evaporates from the flowing mercury pool maintained at elevated temperatures (typically 50–80°C) to facilitate amalgam formation and circulation. This vaporization is exacerbated by the large surface area of mercury exposed in the cells and during pumping and recirculation, leading to air emissions estimated at 7.6 metric tons annually across U.S. operations in 1996. Cell room ventilation and stack emissions contribute further, with historical uncontrolled rates reaching up to 3 kg of mercury per metric ton of produced, though modern controls reduced this to 0.47–2.5 g per metric ton. Liquid mercury losses manifest in wastewater streams, including brine purges, cell wash waters, and decomposer effluents, where mercury concentrations can reach 0–20 ppm due to incomplete separation from the amalgam or entrainment in aqueous phases. These effluents are typically treated via to form insoluble mercuric sulfide, but residual releases to totaled 0.2 metric tons in U.S. chlor-alkali operations in 1996. Additionally, mercury contaminates process byproducts: trace amounts carry over into caustic soda via inefficiencies and into gas evolved during amalgam , necessitating downstream removal by adsorption or fresh mercury amalgamation. Product-associated mercury losses were under 1 metric ton in 1996 U.S. data. Solid wastes, particularly salt sludges from brine purification, accumulate mercury as elemental Hg⁰ and soluble chloro-mercurate complexes (e.g., HgCl₃⁻, HgCl₄²⁻), with total mercury concentrations in sludges ranging from 33.1 to 1,246 mg/kg. Disposal of these sludges to landfills accounted for 19 metric tons of mercury in 1996, posing risks of subsurface migration and re-emission as Hg⁰ under environmental conditions like solar irradiation. Mechanical losses from equipment leaks, spills during mercury handling, and end-box ventilation further contribute to around facilities. Overall, these mechanisms result in unaccounted losses approximating 10 metric tons annually in 1996 U.S. inventories, underscoring inefficiencies in mercury recirculation despite efforts to minimize emissions.

Health and Ecological Consequences

Mercury emissions and losses from the Castner–Kellner process, which relies on a flowing for of to produce and , result in contamination of air, water, sediments, and soil around operational and abandoned facilities. These losses, often unaccounted for in plant balances, occur via brine purification effluents, gas streams, and equipment leaks, with historical annual discrepancies reported as high as several kilograms per of produced. Human health consequences stem primarily from of mercury vapors near plants and of bioaccumulated in from contaminated waters. Chronic low-level exposure to inorganic mercury vapors has been associated with neurological effects, including tremors, impairment, and psychological disturbances, as observed in workers at chlor-alkali facilities. , the most toxic form produced via microbial in sediments, crosses the blood-brain barrier and , causing developmental in fetuses and children—such as reduced IQ and motor deficits—and neurodegenerative conditions resembling or in adults. Local populations near plants, including those in the region affected by historical operations, face elevated risks through fish consumption, with factors amplifying exposure. Ecological impacts involve mercury's persistence and , disrupting aquatic and terrestrial food webs. In water bodies, inorganic mercury converts to bioavailable , inhibiting algal and reproduction while impairing fish growth, brain function, and spawning success. leads to elevated concentrations in predatory species, causing reproductive failure and population declines in birds and mammals dependent on aquatic prey. Sediments near abandoned chlor-alkali sites retain mercury for decades, leaching into and streams, which sustains to benthic organisms and perpetuates trophic transfer. These effects have been documented in estuaries and rivers adjacent to mercury cell plants, where total mercury levels in biota exceed safe thresholds by factors of 10–100.

Comparisons to Modern Alternatives

Versus Diaphragm Cell Process

The Castner–Kellner process, utilizing a flowing mercury cathode to form sodium amalgam, produces sodium hydroxide (NaOH) of significantly higher purity compared to the diaphragm cell process, which relies on an asbestos or polymer diaphragm to separate anodic chlorine gas from cathodic NaOH solution and prevent excessive mixing of brine products. In the mercury cell, the NaOH emerges from the decomposer with chloride contamination below 50 ppm and a concentration of approximately 50% by weight, often requiring minimal further evaporation for high-purity applications such as rayon production. Conversely, diaphragm cell effluent typically contains 10-15% NaOH with 12-15% residual NaCl, demanding extensive evaporation and purification to achieve usable concentrations, which increases energy demands for steam generation and introduces impurities that limit its suitability for premium-grade caustic soda. Energy consumption favors the diaphragm cell, which operates at a lower cell voltage of about 3.5 V versus 4.5 V for the mercury cell, resulting in roughly 20-25% less electrical power per metric ton of produced—typically 2,500-2,800 kWh/ton for diaphragm versus 3,200-3,500 kWh/ton for mercury. This efficiency stems from the diaphragm's simpler design and reduced , though it is offset by higher needs for concentrating the dilute, salt-laden caustic. The mercury process, while enabling continuous operation without compartment separation issues, incurs greater overall energy penalties due to amalgam decomposition and mercury recirculation pumps.
AspectMercury Cell (Castner–Kellner)Diaphragm Cell
NaOH PurityHigh (low Cl⁻, ~50% concentration direct)Moderate (high NaCl, requires purification)
Cell Voltage~4.5 V~3.5 V
Energy Use (kWh/ton Cl₂)3,200-3,5002,500-2,800
Capital CostHigher (mercury handling systems)Lower (simpler construction)
Purity RequirementHigh purity needed to avoid impuritiesTolerates less pure
Operationally, the diaphragm cell accommodates lower-quality brine feedstocks, reducing pretreatment costs, but its diaphragm degrades over time, leading to inconsistent product separation and higher maintenance. The mercury cell avoids such degradation but demands rigorous mercury emission controls to prevent environmental release, a factor absent in diaphragm designs until asbestos concerns prompted material shifts. Overall, while the Castner–Kellner process excelled in delivering uncontaminated outputs for specialized uses, the diaphragm cell's lower energy and capital requirements made it more prevalent in bulk production until both were supplanted by technologies for balancing efficiency and purity.

Versus Membrane Cell Process

The Castner–Kellner process, a mercury cell method, differs fundamentally from the membrane cell process in its use of a mercury to form a , which is subsequently decomposed to yield , whereas the membrane cell employs a selective to separate the and compartments, permitting sodium ions to migrate while preventing and mixing. This structural distinction leads to divergent outputs: the mercury process directly produces 50% concentration with very low contamination (typically under 50 ppm), alongside high-purity gas and , while the membrane process yields approximately 30–35% initially, requiring additional evaporation to reach 50% concentration and resulting in modestly higher salt content (around 100–500 ppm). In terms of energy efficiency, membrane cells generally consume 25–30% less electricity per ton of produced compared to mercury cells, with modern membrane systems operating at 2,500–2,800 kWh/ton Cl₂ versus 3,100–3,500 kWh/ton for mercury processes, though the 's need for downstream caustic concentration partially offsets this advantage by adding demands. Capital costs for membrane installations are higher due to advanced materials and bipolar designs, but operating costs favor membranes through reduced use and elimination of mercury handling, recirculation pumps, and decomposers inherent to the Castner–Kellner setup.
AspectMercury Cell (Castner–Kellner)Membrane Cell
NaOH ConcentrationDirect 50%30–35% (requires to 50%)
NaOH Purity (NaCl)<50 ppm100–500 ppm
Energy Use (kWh/t Cl₂)3,100–3,5002,500–2,800
Environmental ImpactMercury emissions and wasteNo mercury; lower overall emissions
The membrane process's ecological superiority stems from avoiding mercury contamination entirely, enabling compliance with stringent regulations like the Minamata Convention, which has driven the phase-out of mercury cells globally since 2013, whereas the Castner–Kellner process incurs ongoing risks of mercury leakage into products and effluents, historically contaminating waterways and biota near facilities. Despite mercury cells' historical edge in product purity without further processing, membrane technology's and lower long-term costs have positioned it as the dominant method, accounting for over 80% of new chlor-alkali capacity installations by the .

Decline and Obsolescence

Regulatory Pressures

The mercury cell process, including the Castner–Kellner variant, has been subject to stringent regulatory measures worldwide due to persistent mercury emissions and risks, prompting a global shift away from its use in chlor-alkali production. In the , the chlor-alkali industry voluntarily committed in 2001 to fully phase out mercury cell technology by 2020, a pledge reinforced by subsequent national implementations that closed the last operating plants by that deadline. This timeline aligned with broader EU directives on industrial emissions and hazardous substances, which imposed emission limits and decontamination requirements for decommissioning sites, accelerating conversions to or diaphragm cells. Globally, the , which entered into force on August 16, 2017, mandates the phase-out of mercury use in chlor-alkali processes by 2025, with provisions for two five-year extensions under specific conditions such as economic or technical infeasibility. As of 2024, over 140 parties have ratified the treaty, driving conversions in regions like and Asia; for instance, launched initiatives in 2024 to eliminate mercury cells in line with its obligations, supported by $12 million in international funding. Non-compliance risks trade restrictions on mercury and products from such processes, further pressuring legacy operations. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established mercury emission standards under the 2003 Clean Air Act amendments for existing mercury cell facilities, limiting vent emissions to 0.045 kilograms per day and requiring best available control technologies. Subsequent risk and technology reviews, including a 2020 proposal and 2022 final rule, further tightened controls on air toxics like mercury and , imposing beyond-MACT standards that increased compliance costs and incentivized shutdowns or conversions. These measures, informed by Minamata obligations, have reduced U.S. mercury cell capacity significantly, though a small number of persist under ongoing emission monitoring. Regulatory frameworks in other jurisdictions, such as Canada's 2018 repeal of outdated effluent rules in favor of modern performance standards, similarly support phase-out while addressing legacy contamination.

Technological Transitions

The primary technological transition away from the Castner–Kellner mercury cell process involved the adoption of membrane cell electrolysis, which separates the anode and cathode compartments using selective ion-exchange membranes that allow sodium ions to migrate while blocking chloride and hydroxide ions, thereby eliminating mercury use and enabling direct production of dilute sodium hydroxide (approximately 30-35% concentration). This shift reduced cell voltage requirements to 3.5-4 volts per cell, compared to 4.5 volts in mercury cells, yielding energy savings of about 26%. Membrane technology advanced significantly in the 1970s following the introduction of dimensionally stable anodes ( oxide-coated ), which lowered overpotentials and facilitated membrane integration; perfluorosulfonic acid s, such as those based on , enabled commercial scalability by the 1980s, producing higher-purity caustic soda with minimal salt contamination. Unlike mercury cells, which form a requiring a separate decomposer to liberate 50% NaOH via reaction with , membrane cells generate and dilute NaOH at the , necessitating downstream multi-effect evaporators that consume less than 1 tonne of steam per tonne of caustic soda. Converting existing mercury cell facilities to membrane technology entails removing mercury handling systems, installing new electrolyzer stacks (often bipolar configurations for efficiency), purifying feeds to prevent , and adding units; these retrofits demand high capital expenditures, with payback periods exceeding 20 years based primarily on energy efficiencies rather than product quality alone, as mercury cells inherently yield purer 50% NaOH without . Globally, this transition accelerated post-2000, with mercury cell capacity declining from over 90 plants in 2001 to fewer than 35 by 2015, driven by iterative improvements in membrane durability and current efficiency exceeding 95%. By the 2020s, new chlor-alkali installations exclusively employed membrane cells, rendering the Castner–Kellner process obsolete for greenfield projects.

References

  1. https://chem.libretexts.org/Courses/Mount_Royal_University/Chem_1202/Unit_6:_Electrochemistry/6.8:_Industrial_Electrolysis_Processes
  2. https://www.ineos.com/businesses/ineos-electrochemical-solutions/electrolysers/chlor-alkali-process/
  3. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c07276
  4. https://catalogimages.wiley.com/images/db/pdf/9780470180983.excerpt.pdf
  5. https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/features/salt-of-the-earth-part-2/
  6. https://www.soci.org/about-us/history/notable-scientists-and-inventors/hamilton-young-castner
  7. https://2024.sci-hub.se/5550/786249d32babf93fcaeea8e22c8764e2/10.1080%4015275922.2016.1177755.pdf
  8. https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/castners-electrode/5938.article
  9. https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Castner_Kellner_Alkali_Co
  10. https://patents.google.com/patent/US586729A/en
  11. http://pubsapp.acs.org/subscribe/archive/tcaw/11/i04/html/04chemistry.html
  12. https://saltassociation.co.uk/education/salt-the-chemical-revolution/electrolysis-of-brine/
  13. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-94-017-3253-6.pdf
  14. https://www.academia.edu/62721009/History_of_the_Chlor_Alkali_Industry
  15. https://www.icheme.org/media/10627/ii-paper-06.pdf
  16. https://extranet.spectro.com/-/media/ametekspectroextranet/files/repeated/2011/eliminating_mercury_from_chlorine_production_sep11_web0.pdf?dmc=1&la=en
  17. https://gaftp.epa.gov/ap42/ch08/s11/final/c08s11_1995.pdf
  18. https://www.eurochlor.org/about-chlor-alkali/how-are-chlorine-and-caustic-soda-made/mercury-cell-process/
  19. https://www.ausetute.com.au/chloralkali.html
  20. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9783527613380.ch5
  21. https://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/industries_technologies/imf/pdfs/1797_advanced_chlor-alkali.pdf
  22. https://www.rroij.com/open-access/modified-industrial-chlor-alkali-process-for-reduction-in-power-consumption-.pdf
  23. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/towards-more-energy-efficient-chlor-alkali-electrolysis
  24. https://asbp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Chlorine-Building-Materials-Phase-1-v2.pdf
  25. https://scispace.com/pdf/the-present-position-and-future-prospects-of-the-3ecemzuibh.pdf
  26. https://edu.rsc.org/feature/greener-chlorine/2020160.article
  27. https://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2020-03/superseded_cak_bref_1201.pdf
  28. https://www.rsc.org/images/PDF2_tcm18-40418.pdf
  29. https://chem.libretexts.org/Courses/University_of_British_Columbia/UBC_CHEM_154%253A_Chemistry_for_Engineering/11%253A_Electrochemistry/11.6%253A_Industrial_Electrolysis_Processes
  30. https://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/resources/chemicals/pdfs/profile_chap6.pdf
  31. https://www.oxy.com/siteassets/documents/chemicals/products/chlor-alkali/caustic.pdf
  32. https://bureau-industrial-transformation.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2020-03/superseded_cak_bref_1201.pdf
  33. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Analytical_Chemistry/Supplemental_Modules_%28Analytical_Chemistry%29/Electrochemistry/Exemplars/Case_Study%253A_Industrial_Electrolysis
  34. https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/EPA_ES_Chlor-Alkali_Guide_20250114.pdf
  35. https://www.miga.org/sites/default/files/archive/Documents/ChlorAlkali.pdf
  36. https://www.zeromercury.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ZMWG6_Chlor_alkali_FS0111_04.pdf
  37. https://pubsapp.acs.org/subscribe/archive/tcaw/11/i04/html/04chemistry.html
  38. https://toxicslink.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Chlorine_Economics_of_Conversion.pdf
  39. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=2000EGT1.TXT
  40. https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/1990/chloralkali-ppah.pdf
  41. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/0281/report.pdf
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10976890/
  43. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236154688_Environmental_Issues_within_the_Chlor-Alkali_Manufacturing_Industry_-Mercury_Cell_Process
  44. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/chlor.pdf
  45. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22429533/
  46. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10803548.2012.11076920
  47. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405665024000854
  48. https://www.epa.gov/international-cooperation/mercury-emissions-global-context
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5969110/
  50. https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-Programs/Environmental-Research/Atmospheric-Deposition/Mercury-Human-Health-and-the-Environment
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0375674218302875
  52. https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/7405/1/Vane_et_al__2009_Mersey_Hg_9_3_09.pdf
  53. https://chem.libretexts.org/Courses/Mount_Royal_University/Chem_1202/Unit_6%253A_Electrochemistry/6.8%253A_Industrial_Electrolysis_Processes
  54. https://ecoquery.ecoinvent.org/3.10/apos/dataset/29959/lci
  55. https://patents.google.com/patent/US3799749A/en
  56. https://www.essentialchemicalindustry.org/chemicals/132kv
  57. https://www.differencebetween.com/what-is-the-difference-between-mercury-cell-and-diaphragm-cell/
  58. https://www.rsc.org/images/PDF1_tcm18-40417.pdf
  59. https://www.products.pcc.eu/en/blog/membrane-electrolysis-vs-mercury-technology/
  60. https://www.vynova-group.com/blog/converting-from-mercury-to-membrane-cells
  61. https://www.nafion.de/-/media/files/nafion/nafion-chlor-alkali-white-paper.pdf
  62. https://chemanager-online.com/en/topics/membrane-technology-in-chlor-alkali-plants
  63. https://www.eurochlor.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/WCC-CA-Manufacturing-Processes-brochure.pdf
  64. https://minamataconvention.org/sites/default/files/documents/submission_from_government/compilation_10_processes.pdf
  65. https://elchemy.com/blogs/chemical-market/optimizing-the-chlor-alkali-process-best-practices-for-cost-reduction-and-product-quality
  66. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-05/FRL-Mercury-Cell-Chlor-Alkali.pdf
  67. https://www.eurochlor.org/topics/mercury/
  68. https://www.ospar.org/news/ospar-has-completely-phased-out-all-mercury-cell-chlor-alkali-plants-in-its-maritime-area
  69. https://worldchlorine.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Env-Prot-3-Edition-6.pdf
  70. https://minamataconvention.org/en/topics/manufacturing-processes-which-mercury-used
  71. https://worldchlorine.org/unep-chlor-alkali-mercury-partnership/
  72. https://www.unep.org/globalmercurypartnership/news/press-release/12-million-project-launched-stop-mercury-use-mexicos-chlor-alkali-industry
  73. https://minamataconvention.org/sites/default/files/documents/2024-09/CombinedPresentations_240911_Processes.pdf
  74. https://downloads.regulations.gov/EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0560-0047/content.pdf
  75. https://minamataconvention.org/sites/default/files/documents/notification/US_Article5_5c.pdf
  76. https://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2019/2019-04-17/html/sor-dors88-eng.html
  77. https://www.eurochlor.org/about-chlor-alkali/how-are-chlorine-and-caustic-soda-made/membrane-cell-process/
  78. https://repositorio-aberto.up.pt/bitstream/10216/60260/1/000143207.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.