4.6 Article

Comparative study on steam reforming of model aromatic compounds of biomass tar over Ni and Ni-Fe alloy nanoparticles

Journal

APPLIED CATALYSIS A-GENERAL
Volume 506, Issue -, Pages 151-162

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apcata.2015.09.007

Keywords

Steam reforming; Toluene; Phenol; Nickel; Iron

Funding

  1. program of Next-generation Energies for Tohoku Recovery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Steam reforming of tar model compounds (benzene, toluene and phenol) was carried out using Ni-Fe/Mg/Al catalysts prepared by calcination and reduction of hydrotalcite-like precursor. Ni-Fe/Mg/Al (Fe/Ni = 0.25) catalyst showed higher activity (similar to twice conversion rate based on catalyst weight) and better resistence to carbon deposition (similar to one order smaller amount of deposited carbon) than Ni/Mg/Al. The difference in the weight-based rate and carbon deposition amount between catalysts with and without Fe was large when benzene or toluene was used as a substrate and high steam/carbon (S/C) ratio was applied. On the other hand, when phenol was used as a substrate, relatively large amount of carbon derived from decomposition of phenol was deposited on Ni-Fe/Mg/Al catalyst even with high (3.8) S/C ratio. The catalyst loses some activity for steam reforming of toluene when treated with phenol (untreated catalyst: similar to 80% conversion of toluene (rate 51 mu mol g(-1).cat s(-1)); treated catalyst similar to 60% (rate 38 mu mol g(-1).cat s(-1))), probably because of the deposited carbon from phenol. Kinetic studies and O-2- or H2O-TPO studies showed that phenol was strongly adsorbed on Fe site as well as Ni site, and the adsorbed phenol could be converted into carbonaceous species under the reaction conditions. On the other hand, the adsorbed phenol on Ni site underwent steam reforming, and the reaction was promoted by Fe. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available