4.6 Article

Performance of Nanosponge and Nanosheet Al- and Ga-MFI Zeolites in Catalytic Pyrolysis of Biomass and Plastics

期刊

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c00413

关键词

MFI zeolite; Ga; waste plastics; lignocellulose residues

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MFI zeolitic materials in the form of nanosponges (nSP) and nanosheets (nSH) incorporating Al and Ga into the framework were synthesized. The catalytic performance of the Al- and Ga-MFI samples in the pyrolysis of LDPE and oak wood was compared, and it was found that nanosponge zeolites showed superior cracking and deoxygenation activity, while Ga-containing materials favored dehydrogenation reactions and enhanced production of aromatic hydrocarbons.
MFI zeolitic materials in the form of nanosponges (nSP) and nanosheets (nSH) have been synthesized incorporating Al and Ga into the framework. Characterization of the samples by Ar adsorption-desorption and FTIR/pyridine indicates that they present remarkable differences in terms of accessibility (external/ mesopore surface area) and acidity (ratio between the concentration of Bronsted and Lewis acid sites). These materials have been investigated as catalysts in the pyrolysis of low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and lignocellulose (oak wood). In spite of very different reaction conditions and operation modes, some common results have been observed when comparing the catalytic performance of the Al- and Ga-MFI samples in both reactions. Nanosponge zeolites show superior cracking and deoxygenation activity during the catalytic conversion of LDPE and oak wood, respectively. On the other hand, Ga-containing materials favor the occurrence of dehydrogenation reactions due to their relatively high content of Lewis acid sites followed by the enhanced production of aromatic hydrocarbons. Overall, the Ga-MFI-nSP sample exhibits remarkable catalytic properties due to a suitable combination of accessibility and acid properties, the latter arising from the Ga incorporation into the zeolite framework.

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