4.8 Article

Rhenium complexes and clusters supported on γ-Al2O3: Effects of rhenium oxidation state and rhenium cluster size on catalytic activity for n-butane hydrogenolysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
卷 268, 期 1, 页码 89-99

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2009.09.006

关键词

EXAFS spectroscopy; Supported rhenium clusters; Rhenium oxidation state; n-Butane hydrogenolysis

资金

  1. US Department of Energy, Office of Energy Research, Basic Energy Sciences [FG02-87ER15600, DE-AC02-98CH10886]
  2. Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research
  3. National Institutes of Health
  4. Synchrotron Catalysis Consortium [DE-FG02-05ER15688]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Supported metals prepared from H3Re3(CO)(12) on gamma-Al2O3 were treated under conditions that led to various rhenium structures on the support and were tested as catalysts for n-butane conversion in the presence of H-2 in a flow reactor at 533 K and 1 atm. After use, two samples were characterized by X-ray absorption edge positions of approximately 5.6 eV (relative to rhenium metal), indicating that the rhenium was cationic and essentially in the same average oxidation state in each. But the Re-Re coordination numbers found by extended X-ray absorption fine structure spectroscopy (2.2 and 5.1) show that the clusters in the two samples were significantly different in average nuclearity despite their indistinguishable rhenium oxidation states. Spectra of a third sample after catalysis indicate approximately Re-3 clusters, on average, and an edge position of 4.5 eV. Thus, two samples contained clusters approximated as Re-3 (on the basis of the Re-Re coordination number), on average, with different average rhenium oxidation states. The data allow resolution of the effects of rhenium oxidation state and cluster size, both of which affect the catalytic activity; larger clusters and a greater degree of reduction lead to increased activity. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.8
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