4.7 Article

Ex-situ catalytic upgrading of pyrolysis vapors using mixed metal oxides

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105241

关键词

Biomass pyrolysis; Bio-oils; Catalytic upgrading; Nb-based oxides

资金

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [818120]
  2. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [818120] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ex-situ catalytic fast pyrolysis was used to produce bio-oils from beech wood with Nb-based mixed oxides catalysts. The Lewis acid sites of NbxMnyOz were found to perform similarly to the Brønsted sites of H-ZSM-5, effectively improving the quality and selectivity of bio-oils while reducing oxygen content.
Ex-situ catalytic fast pyrolysis (CFP) was employed to produce bio-oils from beech wood. The effect of Nb-based mixed oxides (with second metal oxide = W, Al or Mn) in upgrading the pyrolysis vapors was compared to an HZSM-5 catalyst and to non-catalyzed pyrolysis. The catalysts acidic properties were assessed by NH3-TPD and FTIR of adsorbed pyridine. The bio-oils obtained were characterized by Karl-Fischer titration, GPC, CHNS analyses, 13C-NMR, GC-MS, GCxGC-MS. In spite their very different acidic properties, the NbxMnyOz catalyst (with essentially Lewis acid sites) exhibited similar performances as H-ZSM-5 (that presents a high density of Bronsted sites), in terms of liquid phase selectivity and reduction of oxygen content in the bio-oils produced. These observations were accompanied by a reduction of compounds such as acids, aldehydes, ketones, ethers and sugars that contribute to the detrimental properties of bio-oils. Finally, the results suggest that the Lewis acid sites of NbxMnyOz are converted into Bronsted sites in the presence of water vapor produced by pyrolysis of wood, whereas the strongest Bronsted sites of H-ZSM-5 have a limited impact on the upgrading process due to their limited accessibility for most components of pyrolysis vapors.

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

4.7
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