4.6 Article

Enhanced Activity for CO Preferential Oxidation over CuO Catalysts Supported on Nanosized CeO2 with High Surface Area and Defects

期刊

CATALYSTS
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/catal11080884

关键词

CuO catalyst; nanosized ceria; oxygen vacancy; CO preferential oxidation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21563014]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province [21563014, 21403093]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanosized ceria was synthesized using a facile method in 2-methylimidazole solution, which exhibited excellent catalytic activity in the preferential oxidation of CO in H2-rich gases. The CuO/n-CeO2 catalyst with higher copper loading, CuCeO9, showed the highest activity and stability for complete CO conversion.
Nanosizedceria (n-CeO2) was synthesized by a facile method in 2-methylimidazolesolution. The characterization results of XRD, N-2 adsorption-desorption, Raman and TEM indicate that n-CeO2 shows a regular size of 10 +/- 1 nm, a high surface area of 130 m(2)center dot g(-1) and oxygen vacancies on the surface. A series of CuO/n-CeO2 catalysts (CuCeOX) with different copper loading were prepared for the preferential oxidation of CO in H-2-rich gases (CO-PROX). All CuCeOX catalysts exhibit a high catalytic activity due to the excellent structural properties of n-CeO2, over which the 100% conversion of CO is obtained at 120 degrees C. The catalytic activity of CuCeOX catalysts increases in the order of CuCeO12 < CuCeO3 < CuCeO6 < CuCeO9. It is in good agreement with the order of the amount of active Cu+ species, Ce3+ species and oxygen vacancies on these catalysts, suggesting that the strength of interaction between highly dispersed CuO species and n-CeO2 is the decisive factor for the activity. The stronger interaction results in the formation of more readily reducible copper species on CuCeO9, which shows the highest activity with high stability and the broadest temperature window for complete CO conversion (120-180 degrees C).

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