4.8 Article

In Situ Generation of the Cu@3D-ZrOx Framework Catalyst for Selective Methanol Synthesis from CO2/H2

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 93-102

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.9b03738

关键词

CO2 hydrogenation; methanol synthesis; UiO-66; Cu-ZrOx interfaces; Framework structure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21872106, 21603244]
  2. China National Key Research and Development Plan Project [2018YFB1502000]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2042019kf0019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cu-based catalysts have been widely studied for direct hydrogenation of CO2 to methanol. Their activities quite depend on the amount of exposed active sites (e.g., Cu-oxide interfaces), which can be tuned by the particle size as well as porosity. Here, we report an active, selective, and stable Cu@ZrOx catalyst with a three-dimensional (3D) porous framework structure via the in situ reconstruction of size-confined Cu@UiO-66. The optimized CU-0.5-300 catalyst shows a high methanol selectivity of 78.8% at a conversion of 13.1% at 260 degrees C, 4.5 MPa, giving a methanol space-time yield of 796 g.kg(cat)(-1).h(-1). It also shows long-term stability for 105 h in a time-on-stream test. Such good performance benefits from abundant Cu-ZrOx interfaces and a stable 3D ZrOx framework. During the reaction, ZrOx species in situ evolves from the unstable Zr-oxide cluster (the building unit of UiO-66) or amorphous ZrO2 to a stable tetragonal ZrO2 phase, but strong metal-support interaction (SMSI) at Cu-ZrOx interfaces retains. The SMSI enables the formation of Cu+ at the ZrO2 surface, which is strongly associated with the active sites for methanol synthesis. In situ diffuse-reflectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy studies reveal methanol synthesis which follows a HCOO-intermediated pathway. It is believed that this work provides an in situ reconstruction strategy to fabricate a practical Cu@ZrOx framework catalyst for methanol production.

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