4.7 Article

Effect of the magnesia and alumina in the modified-supported perovskite-type catalysts for the dry reforming of methane

Journal

FUEL
Volume 302, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121233

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. SERB, DST, India [ECR/2016/001424, SMILE-10/2017]
  2. SERB

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A series of supported perovskite-type catalysts were synthesized, with the addition of ceria improving the surface area of the catalyst. The modified-supported catalysts showed improved performance in the DRM reaction, with nickel-aluminate and nickel-magnesia solid solutions observed. The most effective catalyst identified was 40LaNi0.75Ce0.05Zr0.20O3/8MgO-SiO2.
A series of supported perovskite-type catalysts were synthesized. The support (SiO2) was modified with alumina and magnesia to prepare the modified-supported catalysts. The synthesized catalysts were assessed for DRM reaction for the production of syngas. The surface area of the synthesized catalyst increased with addition of ceria in a certain ratio (x = 0.05). The surface area did not change significantly as the support-modified with alumina or magnesia. The nickel-aluminate and nickel-magnesia solid solution were observed in the modified-supported perovskite catalysts. It assisted in improving the surface basicity of silica, and increasing the percent conversion and percent product yield. The optimum ratio of reactant (methane and carbon dioxide) in the feed stream was suggested to be 1. The ratio of H2/CO increased (> 1) as increasing the methane to carbon dioxide ratio suggested that the methane cracking dominated over DRM. The carbon deposition over the catalyst surface was due to the methane cracking reaction. The carbon deposited in all catalysts however; the activity of the catalyst was unaffected. The most effective catalyst was found to be 40LaNi0.75Ce0.05Zr0.20O3/8MgO-SiO2.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available