FIG. 1 is an image showing a surface contact angle of 20 a graphene coating layer according to Comparative Example 1-1;

FIG. 2 is an image showing variation in surface contact angle of a graphene coating layer according to Example 1-1; 25

FIG. 3. The 33 results indicate that, when UV irradiation or plasma treatment is conducted on the graphene oxide coating layer, the contact angle of graphene …

FIG. 4. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited a carbon dioxide gas permeability of 100 to 110 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 5. Example 1-2 exhibited oxygen and nitrogen permeabilities of 10 to 30 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 6. 20 These results indicate that the gas separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 having an increased contact angle have an improved gas …

FIG. 7. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited water permeability of 1.5 to 10 LMH/bar, as can be seen from

FIG. 8 and Example 2 exhibited water permeability of 1 to 5 LMH/bar, as can be seen from 15

FIG. 9. These results indicate that the water separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 with an increased contact angle have an improved water …

FIG. 10 is an image showing a graphene oxide dispersion used in Example 2-1, a graphene oxide 15 dispersion having an adjusted pH and a mixed solution …

FIG. 11 is an image comparing graphene oxide coating layers according to Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2- 1, after stirring in water; 20

FIG. 12 is an image showing delamination in Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2-1;

FIG. 13 is a graph showing a difference in water permeability between Example 2-2 and Comparative Example 2-1; 25

FIG. 14 is a graph comparing water permeability of 11 graphene oxide composite membranes between before and after treating with an amine solution according to …

FIG. 15. As can be seen from

FIG. 16 is a graph comparing water permeability and salt rejection between graphene oxide composite membranes 10 according to Example 2-2 and Example 2-3;

FIG. 17 is a graph comparing surface element analysis results in Example 2-2;

FIG. 18 is a graph showing analysis of crystallinity and interlayer distance variation of the graphene oxide 15 layer according to Example 2-2;

FIG. 19. In addition, as can be seen from

FIG. 20 14. This indicates that water permeability is decreased due to stabilization of the graphene oxide coating layer after amine treatment. In addition, …

FIG. 21C: 2 % by weight), surface porosity increases and formation of a porous support structure is facilitated. The results indicate that, as the content of …

FIG. 22 shows surface porosity variation and structure variation of the porous polymer support 25 according to ethanol content variation in Example 3-2;

FIG. 23 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation according to PES content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 24 is a graph showing carbon dioxide 5 permeability variation according to PVP content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 25 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the porous polymer support according to ethanol content in Example 3-2; 10

FIG. 26 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the gas separation membrane produced in Example 3-2 according to ethanol content;

FIG. 27 is an image comparing surface conditions after graphene oxide coating between Example 3-1 and 15 C omparative Example 3-1;

FIG. 28 shows surface porosity variation of a porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3;

FIG. 29 is a graph showing water permeability 20 variation of the porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3; and

FIG. 30 is a graph showing water permeability variation of a composite membrane produced by treating with oxygen plasma and then coating with graphene oxide as …

FIG. 1 is an image showing a surface contact angle of 20 a graphene coating layer according to Comparative Example 1-1;

FIG. 2 is an image showing variation in surface contact angle of a graphene coating layer according to Example 1-1; 25

FIG. 3. The 33 results indicate that, when UV irradiation or plasma treatment is conducted on the graphene oxide coating layer, the contact angle of graphene …

FIG. 4. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited a carbon dioxide gas permeability of 100 to 110 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 5. Example 1-2 exhibited oxygen and nitrogen permeabilities of 10 to 30 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 6. 20 These results indicate that the gas separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 having an increased contact angle have an improved gas …

FIG. 7. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited water permeability of 1.5 to 10 LMH/bar, as can be seen from

FIG. 8 and Example 2 exhibited water permeability of 1 to 5 LMH/bar, as can be seen from 15

FIG. 9. These results indicate that the water separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 with an increased contact angle have an improved water …

FIG. 10 is an image showing a graphene oxide dispersion used in Example 2-1, a graphene oxide 15 dispersion having an adjusted pH and a mixed solution …

FIG. 11 is an image comparing graphene oxide coating layers according to Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2- 1, after stirring in water; 20

FIG. 12 is an image showing delamination in Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2-1;

FIG. 13 is a graph showing a difference in water permeability between Example 2-2 and Comparative Example 2-1; 25

FIG. 14 is a graph comparing water permeability of 11 graphene oxide composite membranes between before and after treating with an amine solution according to …

FIG. 15. As can be seen from

FIG. 16 is a graph comparing water permeability and salt rejection between graphene oxide composite membranes 10 according to Example 2-2 and Example 2-3;

FIG. 17 is a graph comparing surface element analysis results in Example 2-2;

FIG. 18 is a graph showing analysis of crystallinity and interlayer distance variation of the graphene oxide 15 layer according to Example 2-2;

FIG. 19. In addition, as can be seen from

FIG. 20 14. This indicates that water permeability is decreased due to stabilization of the graphene oxide coating layer after amine treatment. In addition, …

FIG. 21C: 2 % by weight), surface porosity increases and formation of a porous support structure is facilitated. The results indicate that, as the content of …

FIG. 22 shows surface porosity variation and structure variation of the porous polymer support 25 according to ethanol content variation in Example 3-2;

FIG. 23 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation according to PES content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 24 is a graph showing carbon dioxide 5 permeability variation according to PVP content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 25 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the porous polymer support according to ethanol content in Example 3-2; 10

FIG. 26 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the gas separation membrane produced in Example 3-2 according to ethanol content;

FIG. 27 is an image comparing surface conditions after graphene oxide coating between Example 3-1 and 15 C omparative Example 3-1;

FIG. 28 shows surface porosity variation of a porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3;

FIG. 29 is a graph showing water permeability 20 variation of the porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3; and

FIG. 30 is a graph showing water permeability variation of a composite membrane produced by treating with oxygen plasma and then coating with graphene oxide as …

FIG. 1 is an image showing a surface contact angle of 20 a graphene coating layer according to Comparative Example 1-1;

FIG. 2 is an image showing variation in surface contact angle of a graphene coating layer according to Example 1-1; 25

FIG. 3. The 33 results indicate that, when UV irradiation or plasma treatment is conducted on the graphene oxide coating layer, the contact angle of graphene …

FIG. 4. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited a carbon dioxide gas permeability of 100 to 110 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 5. Example 1-2 exhibited oxygen and nitrogen permeabilities of 10 to 30 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 6. 20 These results indicate that the gas separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 having an increased contact angle have an improved gas …

FIG. 7. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited water permeability of 1.5 to 10 LMH/bar, as can be seen from

FIG. 8 and Example 2 exhibited water permeability of 1 to 5 LMH/bar, as can be seen from 15

FIG. 9. These results indicate that the water separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 with an increased contact angle have an improved water …

FIG. 10 is an image showing a graphene oxide dispersion used in Example 2-1, a graphene oxide 15 dispersion having an adjusted pH and a mixed solution …

FIG. 11 is an image comparing graphene oxide coating layers according to Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2- 1, after stirring in water; 20

FIG. 12 is an image showing delamination in Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2-1;

FIG. 13 is a graph showing a difference in water permeability between Example 2-2 and Comparative Example 2-1; 25

FIG. 14 is a graph comparing water permeability of 11 graphene oxide composite membranes between before and after treating with an amine solution according to …

FIG. 15. As can be seen from

FIG. 16 is a graph comparing water permeability and salt rejection between graphene oxide composite membranes 10 according to Example 2-2 and Example 2-3;

FIG. 17 is a graph comparing surface element analysis results in Example 2-2;

FIG. 18 is a graph showing analysis of crystallinity and interlayer distance variation of the graphene oxide 15 layer according to Example 2-2;

FIG. 19. In addition, as can be seen from

FIG. 20 14. This indicates that water permeability is decreased due to stabilization of the graphene oxide coating layer after amine treatment. In addition, …

FIG. 21C: 2 % by weight), surface porosity increases and formation of a porous support structure is facilitated. The results indicate that, as the content of …

FIG. 22 shows surface porosity variation and structure variation of the porous polymer support 25 according to ethanol content variation in Example 3-2;

FIG. 23 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation according to PES content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 24 is a graph showing carbon dioxide 5 permeability variation according to PVP content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 25 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the porous polymer support according to ethanol content in Example 3-2; 10

FIG. 26 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the gas separation membrane produced in Example 3-2 according to ethanol content;

FIG. 27 is an image comparing surface conditions after graphene oxide coating between Example 3-1 and 15 C omparative Example 3-1;

FIG. 28 shows surface porosity variation of a porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3;

FIG. 29 is a graph showing water permeability 20 variation of the porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3; and

FIG. 30 is a graph showing water permeability variation of a composite membrane produced by treating with oxygen plasma and then coating with graphene oxide as …

FIG. 1 is an image showing a surface contact angle of 20 a graphene coating layer according to Comparative Example 1-1;

FIG. 2 is an image showing variation in surface contact angle of a graphene coating layer according to Example 1-1; 25

FIG. 3. The 33 results indicate that, when UV irradiation or plasma treatment is conducted on the graphene oxide coating layer, the contact angle of graphene …

FIG. 4. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited a carbon dioxide gas permeability of 100 to 110 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 5. Example 1-2 exhibited oxygen and nitrogen permeabilities of 10 to 30 G P U, as can be seen from

FIG. 6. 20 These results indicate that the gas separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 having an increased contact angle have an improved gas …

FIG. 7. On the other hand, Example 1-1 exhibited water permeability of 1.5 to 10 LMH/bar, as can be seen from

FIG. 8 and Example 2 exhibited water permeability of 1 to 5 LMH/bar, as can be seen from 15

FIG. 9. These results indicate that the water separation membranes according to Examples 1-1 and 1-2 with an increased contact angle have an improved water …

FIG. 10 is an image showing a graphene oxide dispersion used in Example 2-1, a graphene oxide 15 dispersion having an adjusted pH and a mixed solution …

FIG. 11 is an image comparing graphene oxide coating layers according to Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2- 1, after stirring in water; 20

FIG. 12 is an image showing delamination in Example 2-1 and Comparative Example 2-1;

FIG. 13 is a graph showing a difference in water permeability between Example 2-2 and Comparative Example 2-1; 25

FIG. 14 is a graph comparing water permeability of 11 graphene oxide composite membranes between before and after treating with an amine solution according to …

FIG. 15. As can be seen from

FIG. 16 is a graph comparing water permeability and salt rejection between graphene oxide composite membranes 10 according to Example 2-2 and Example 2-3;

FIG. 17 is a graph comparing surface element analysis results in Example 2-2;

FIG. 18 is a graph showing analysis of crystallinity and interlayer distance variation of the graphene oxide 15 layer according to Example 2-2;

FIG. 19. In addition, as can be seen from

FIG. 20 14. This indicates that water permeability is decreased due to stabilization of the graphene oxide coating layer after amine treatment. In addition, …

FIG. 21C: 2 % by weight), surface porosity increases and formation of a porous support structure is facilitated. The results indicate that, as the content of …

FIG. 22 shows surface porosity variation and structure variation of the porous polymer support 25 according to ethanol content variation in Example 3-2;

FIG. 23 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation according to PES content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 24 is a graph showing carbon dioxide 5 permeability variation according to PVP content in Example 3-1;

FIG. 25 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the porous polymer support according to ethanol content in Example 3-2; 10

FIG. 26 is a graph showing carbon dioxide permeability variation of the gas separation membrane produced in Example 3-2 according to ethanol content;

FIG. 27 is an image comparing surface conditions after graphene oxide coating between Example 3-1 and 15 C omparative Example 3-1;

FIG. 28 shows surface porosity variation of a porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3;

FIG. 29 is a graph showing water permeability 20 variation of the porous polymer support after oxygen plasma treatment according to Example 3-3; and

FIG. 30 is a graph showing water permeability variation of a composite membrane produced by treating with oxygen plasma and then coating with graphene oxide as …