Applications

Ionic liquids are the beachhead. The architecture is the opportunity.

Each stage opens only when the previous one produces evidence that the architecture transfers. No market sizes are published here.

The market expands only as fast as the architecture proves transferable.

Requirements by application Illustrative · editorial assessment

Each application weighs the same properties differently.

A solvent that wins in one application can fail in the next because a different property decides it. This map records which requirements decide each candidate application.

Application × requirement map

Select a cell for the reasoning

Illustrative

    Levels are Avestiq’s editorial reading of standard engineering requirements, not data, and they will differ by process. “Primary performance” means selectivity and capacity for separations, solubility for CO2 capture, storage density for thermal fluids and conductivity for electrolytes. Stages follow the expansion sequence above. Published work is historical founder research and is not an Avestiq program.

    Scenario explorer Historical founder research Planned constraints

    Move a specification and watch the candidate set change.

    Two published screening datasets and one computed here from published group-contribution parameters. Set the limits an application would impose and see how many candidates survive and which one leads. Toxicity, synthesis, cost and recovery are not in these datasets, so they cannot yet be applied.

    Specification

    Constraints LILM is designed to add

    • Toxicity and ecotoxicity screen
    • Synthesis route and precursor availability
    • Manufacturing cost and supply
    • Recovery, losses and recycle
    • Prediction intervals on every plotted value

    Planned. None of these is available for the candidates shown, so the “best feasible” candidate here is best only on the published criteria.

    The 20-year paradox

    Molecular possibility outran deployment infrastructure.

    Ionic liquids—salts that melt below about 100 °C—can be tuned by changing the cation, the anion and their substituents. Research interest has been sustained for more than two decades, yet relatively few ionic-liquid processes have reached industrial deployment, and they arrived years apart.

    Research attention vs industrial deployment

    Schematic
    Schematic of research attention and industrial deployment of ionic liquids, 2000 to 2026A schematic research-attention curve rises steeply after 2003 while a schematic deployment curve stays low, with dated industrial events: BASIL at BASF (continuous reactor and innovation award, 2004), HycaPure commercial-scale pilot (2012) and ISOALKY start-up (2021).
    Curves are schematic; no adoption data are implied. Dated events are sourced: Rogers & Seddon, Science 2003; BASF/chemie.de 2004; Queen’s University Belfast REF 2021 case study; Oil & Gas Journal, Apr 13, 2021. Examples, not a complete list.

    Each barrier becomes a design constraint

      Barriers named in Greer, Jacquemin & Hardacre, Molecules 2020, 25, 5207, include cost, viscosity, toxicity, purity, compatibility with unit operations and scalable purification.

      Molecular performance alone does not create an industrial technology.

      Industrial proof Industrial case

      The right chemistry can create disproportionate industrial value.

      Three ionic-liquid processes that reached industry. They are third-party technologies, shown as evidence for the chemistry class. They are not Avestiq technologies, and no relationship with these companies is implied.

      Ionic liquids can work.
      The question is whether finding, qualifying and industrializing them can become repeatable.

      Privacy

      Terms