4.6 Article

Highly active and stable Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalysts selectively deposited with CeO2 for CO methanation

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 4, 期 31, 页码 16094-16103

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c4ra00746h

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program [2014CB744306]
  2. National Key Technology RAMP
  3. D Program of China [2010BAC66B01]
  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA07010100, XDA07010200]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report the preparation of highly active, coking-and sintering-resistant CeO2-decorated Ni/gamma-Al2O3 catalysts by an impregnation method followed by a modified deposition-precipitation (DP) of CeO2. The samples were characterized by nitrogen adsorption, X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, thermogravimetric analysis, H-2 temperature-programmed reduction, H2 temperature-programmed desorption and zeta potential analysis. The results revealed that compared with the Ni catalysts with a NiO loading of 40 wt% prepared by co-impregnation (CI) and sequential impregnation (SI) methods, the Ni catalyst synthesized by DP method showed enhanced catalytic performance for CO methanation at atmospheric pressure and an extremely high weight hourly space velocity (WHSV) of 240 000 mL g(-)1 h(-1). In a 50 h high-pressure life-test, this catalyst showed a high resistance to both coking and sintering. It was found that CeO2 nanoparticles were selectively deposited on the surface of NiO rather than on Al2O3 due to the electrostatic interaction during the DP process, effectively preventing Ni particles from sintering during the reduction and reaction at high temperatures, and inhibiting coke formation by increasing the supply of active oxygen species on the nickel surface. As a result, the formed CeO2-decorated Ni/Al2O3 catalyst exhibited excellent catalytic performance and stability in CO methanation. This work demonstrated that catalytic properties could be much improved for a usual catalyst with a well-designed structure.

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

4.6
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