4.8 Article

Enhancing Four-Carbon Olefin Production from Acetylene over Copper Nanoparticles in Metal-Organic Frameworks

期刊

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
卷 12, 期 28, 页码 31496-31502

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.0c08244

关键词

heterogeneous catalysis; nanoparticle; metal-organic framework; green oil; acetylene dimerization

资金

  1. Inorganometallic Catalyst Design Center, an Energy Frontier Research Center - U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0012702]
  2. National Science Foundation [CHE-1566445]
  3. Boston College
  4. National Science Foundation (NSF) [EEC-1757618]
  5. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science, Office of Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists, Office of Science Graduate Student Research (SCGSR) program
  6. ORAU [DE-SC0014664]
  7. Soft and Hybrid Nanotechnology Experimental (SHyNE) Resource (NSF) [ECCS-1542205]
  8. State of Illinois
  9. International Institute for Nanotechnology (IIN)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Four-carbon olefins, such as 1-butene and 1,3-butadiene, are important chemical feedstocks for the production of adhesives and synthetic rubber. These compounds are found in the C-4 fraction of green oil products that can arise during the hydrogenation of acetylene. Here, we demonstrate that control of the catalyst structure increases the yield and productivity of these important olefins with a family of catalyst materials comprising Cu nanoparticles (CuNPs) bound within the pores of Zr-based metal-organic frameworks. Using carbon monoxide as a probe molecule, we characterize the surfaces of these catalytic CuNPs with diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy, revealing that the electronic structure of the CuNP surfaces is size-dependent. Furthermore, we find that as the CuNP diameter decreases, the selectivity for C-4 products increases and that lowering the stoichiometric ratio of H-2/acetylene improves the selectivity and productivity of the catalyst.

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