4.8 Article

CH4 dehydroaromatization on Mo/H-ZSM-5: 1. Effects of co-processing H2 and CH3COOH

期刊

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
卷 306, 期 -, 页码 58-67

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2013.06.003

关键词

Dehydroaromatization; Methane; Hydrogen transfer; Oxygenates; Acetic acid; Molybdenum carbide; H-ZSM-5; Dehydrogenation; Deoxygenation; Kinetic coupling

资金

  1. Catalysis Center for Energy Innovation, an Energy Frontier Research Center
  2. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0001004]
  3. National Science Foundation Emerging Frontiers in Research and Innovation - Hydrocarbons from Biomass (NSF EFRI HyBi) [0937706]
  4. DOE Early Career Program [DE-SC0008418]
  5. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities
  6. Directorate For Engineering [0937706] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0008418] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The co-processing of acetic acid with methane (CH3COOH/CH4 = 0.04-0.10) on Mo/ZSM-5 formulations at 950 K and atmospheric pressure in an effort to couple deoxygenation and dehydrogenation reaction sequences results instead in a stratified reactor bed with upstream CH4 reforming with acetic acid and downstream CH4 pyrolysis. X-ray absorption spectroscopy and chemical transient experiments show that molybdenum carbide is formed inside zeolite micropores during CH4 reactions. The introduction of acetic acid oxidizes a fraction of these carbide moieties upstream while producing H-2 and CO mixtures until completely consumed. Forward rates of CH4 pyrolysis are unperturbed in the presence of an acetic acid or hydrogen co-feed after rigorously accounting for the reversibility of pyrolysis rates and the fraction of molybdenum carbide oxidized by CH3COOH implying that all consequences of CH3COOH and H-2 co-feeds can be interpreted in terms of an approach to equilibrium. (C) 2013 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