4.5 Article

Effect of multi-layered nanosheets γ-Al2O3 with (110) facets on zinc deactivation resistance for Ce-Ti SCR catalyst

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ENERGY INSTITUTE
卷 101, 期 -, 页码 221-232

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.joei.2022.01.015

关键词

Multi-layered nanosheets gamma-Al2O3; Zinc poisoning resistance; Active oxygen species; Acid sites; CeTiOx catalysts

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2021QE150]
  2. Center for Materials Research and Analysis, Wuhan University of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study introduces multi-layered nanosheets γ-Al2O3 structure to improve the Zn-poisoning resistance performance of SCR catalysts. The catalyst with multi-layered nanosheets shows excellent catalytic activity with over 90% NO conversion. Zn species prefer to adsorb on multi-layered nanosheets γ-Al2O3, effectively protecting CeO2.
Zn species that exist in the flue gas are dangerous toxicants for SCR catalysts, which will seriously damage its catalytic activity and service life. Hence, the multi-layered nanosheets gamma-Al2O3 with (110) facets were introduced into the CeTiOx catalyst to improve the Zn-poisoning resistance performance. Benefiting from the structural and compositional merits, as well as the superior reducibility, abundant acid sites, and chemisorbed oxygen, the 3% Zn-Ce-0.3-Al-0.4-Ti catalyst with multi-layered nanosheets structure exhibits excellent NH3-SCR activity, over 90% NO conversion between 240 degrees C and 340 degrees C. In addition, in situ DRIFTS results suggest the SCR reaction mainly follows L-H and E-R mechanisms on 3%-Ce-0.3-Al-0.4-Ti samples, result from the multi-layered nanosheets gamma-Al2O structure improves the BET specific surface area and Ce3+, promotes the adsorption/activation of more NH3 and NOx species. More interestingly, compared with CeO2 and TiO2 the Zn species prefer to absorbed on nanosheets gamma-Al2O3 with (110) facets, so it can effectively protect CeO2 from poisoning as a sacrificial agent.

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

4.5
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