4.6 Article

Comparison of the effects of the catalyst preparation method and CeO2 morphology on the catalytic activity of Pt/CeO2 catalysts for the water-gas shift reaction

期刊

CATALYSIS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 10, 期 18, 页码 6299-6308

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d0cy01067g

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIT) [2020R1A2B5B01002346]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2020R1A2B5B01002346] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the effects of the catalyst preparation method and CeO(2)particle morphology of Pt/CeO(2)catalysts for the water-gas shift reaction are compared. CeO(2)supports having nanorod and nanocube morphologies were prepared. Over both types of supports, 1 wt% Pt was loadedviaeither the incipient wetness impregnation (IWI) method or the strong electrostatic adsorption (SEA) method. In total, four types of Pt/CeO(2)catalysts were prepared, and these were characterized using various techniques and tested for the water-gas shift reaction. The cube-shaped-CeO2-based catalysts showed higher catalytic activities than the rod-shaped-CeO2-based catalysts due to the higher dispersion of Pt(0)regardless of the catalyst preparation method. From the viewpoint of the catalyst preparation method, the IWI-prepared catalysts showed higher catalytic activity than the SEA-prepared catalysts regardless of the morphology of CeO(2)because of the larger amount of oxygen vacancies induced by the strong interaction between PtO(x)and CeO2. These results highlight the fact that the catalyst preparation method and the morphology of the CeO(2)support strongly affect the key factors (Pt(0)dispersion and number of oxygen vacancies) separately, which are directly related to the catalytic activity in the water-gas shift reaction. It also confirms that both key factors should achieve high values to attain high catalytic activity.

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