4.6 Article

Influence of Copper Locations on Catalytic Properties and Activities of Cu/SAPO-34 in C3H6-SCR

期刊

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
卷 60, 期 19, 页码 6940-6949

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c05809

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21878213]
  2. open foundation of the State Key Laboratory of Chemical Engineering [SKL-ChE20B01]
  3. Program of Introducing Talents of Disciplines to China Universities [BP0618007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study reveals that isolated Cu cations are the active sites for C3H6-SCR, while the presence of CuO species enhances the C3H6 activation ability of the catalysts. Tuning the proportion of various copper species can tailor the active temperature window for hydrocarbons-selective catalytic reduction (HC-SCR) reactions, providing new insights into designing highly efficient Cu-based zeolite catalysts.
Herein, Cu-modified SAPO-34 catalysts with various copper loadings are synthesized via a pH-controlled ion-exchange method. Cu exists predominantly as isolated cations at lower loadings, located at octahedrally coordinated sites in the ellipsoidal cavity of SAPO-34 zeolites, while CuO is gradually generated on the external surface at higher loadings. Our results reveal that the isolated Cu cations are the active sites for C3H6-SCR. The presence of CuO species enhances the C3H6 activation ability of the catalysts, which thus, improves the C3H6-SCR performance at medium and low temperatures (below 400 degrees C). At high temperatures, however, the formation of CuO accelerates the nonselective oxidation of C3H6 and causes activity decline. These findings suggest that the active temperature window for hydrocarbons-selective catalytic reduction (HC-SCR) reactions over Cu/SAPO-34 catalysts can be tailored by tuning the proportion of various copper species to fit the need in real applications, which provide new insights into understanding and designing highly efficient Cu-based zeolite catalysts.

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