4.7 Article

Performance of Cu-Zn-Al-Zr catalyst prepared by ultrasonic spray precipitation technique in the synthesis of methanol via CO2 hydrogenation

期刊

FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 169, 期 -, 页码 191-198

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2017.10.004

关键词

CO2 utilization; Catalytic hydrogenation; Methanol synthesis; Cu-Zn-Al-Zr catalyst; Ultrasonic spray precipitation

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia (MOHE) via Fundamental Research Grant Scheme [FRGS/1/2017/TK02/UITM/02/24]
  2. MOHE
  3. UiTM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of the newly improvised catalyst preparation technique, namely ultrasonic spray precipitation (USP), on the physicochemical properties as well as the catalytic performance of Cu-Zn-Al-Zr catalyst in CO2 hydrogenation reaction were studied. Spraying technique is advantageous in generating micro-droplets of catalyst precursors by providing high surface area contact during precipitation, while the incorporation of an ultrasonic irradiation can physically alter the surface morphology of the catalyst. In this study, Cu-Zn-Al-Zr catalysts were prepared using both USP and conventional precipitation (CP) techniques for comparison purposes. Structural analysis showed that USP technique dictated the formation of finer Cu crystallites with better particle uniformity. Meanwhile, TPR results revealed a good interaction between different elements in the catalyst with the formation of single form of oxide species. In terms of reactivity, USP-prepared catalyst outperformed CP catalyst for CO2 conversion by 20.9% and also improved methanol selectivity and yield by 2.7 and 27%, respectively, while reducing noticeably the unwanted CO. It is believed that the improved surface basicity of USP catalyst, which has a great influence on reaction pathways of intermediate species, contributed significantly to the enhanced catalytic performance, and hence justifying the superiority of this new preparation technique over the conventional ones.

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