4.7 Article

High temperature iron-based catalysts for hydrogen and nanostructured carbon production by methane decomposition

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 36, 期 13, 页码 7832-7843

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.01.184

关键词

Hydrogen production; Iron-based catalysts; Methane decomposition; Carbon nanotubes

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (MICINN) [ENE2008-06516]
  2. Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC) [PR2009-0195]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The production of hydrogen and filamentous carbon by means of methane decomposition was investigated in a fixed-bed reactor using iron-based catalysts. The effect of the textural promoter and the addition of Mo as a dopant affects the catalysts performance substantially: iron catalyst prepared with Al2O3 showed slightly higher catalytic performance as compared to those prepared with MgO; Mo addition was found to improve the catalytic performance of the catalyst prepared with MgO, whereas in the catalyst prepared with Al2O3 displayed similar or slightly poorer results. Additionally, the influence of the catalyst reduction temperature, the reaction temperature and the space velocity on the hydrogen yield was thoroughly investigated. The study reveals that iron catalysts allow achieving high methane conversions at operating temperatures higher than 800 degrees C, yielding simultaneously carbon nanofilaments with interesting properties. Thus, at 900 degrees C reaction temperature and 1 lg(cat)(-1)h(-1) space velocity, ca. 93 vol% hydrogen concentration was obtained, which corresponds to a methane conversion of 87%. Additionally, it was found that at temperatures higher than 700 degrees C, carbon co-product is deposited mainly as multi walled carbon nanotubes. The textural and structural properties of the carbonaceous structures obtained are also presented. Copyright (C) 2011, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据