4.7 Article

Understanding the role of Ni-Sn interaction to design highly effective CO2 conversion catalysts for dry reforming of methane

期刊

JOURNAL OF CO2 UTILIZATION
卷 27, 期 -, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcou.2018.06.024

关键词

Bimetallic catalyst; Surface alloy; Ni-Sn surface model; DFT calculations; DRM

资金

  1. Department of Chemical and Process Engineering at the University of Surrey
  2. EPSRC [EP/R512904, EP/J020184/2]
  3. Royal Society Research Grant [RSGR1180353]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

CO2 reforming of methane is an effective route for carbon dioxide recycling to valuable syngas. However conventional catalysts based on Ni fail to overcome the stability requisites in terms of resistance to coking and sintering. In this scenario, the use of Sn as promoter of Ni leads to more powerful bimetallic catalysts with enhanced stability which could result in a viable implementation of the reforming technology at commercial scale. This paper uses a combined computational (DFT) and experimental approach, to address the fundamental aspects of mitigation of coke formation on the catalyst's surface during dry reforming of methane (DRM). The DFT calculation provides fundamental insights into the DRM mechanism over the mono and bimetallic periodic model surfaces. Such information is then used to guide the design of real powder catalysts. The behaviour of the real catalysts mirrors the trends predicted by DFT. Overall the bimetallic catalysts are superior to the monometallic one in terms of long-term stability and carbon tolerance. In particular, low Sn concentration on Ni surface effectively mitigate carbon formation without compromising the CO2 conversion and the syngas production thus leading to excellent DRM catalysts. The bimetallic systems also presents higher selectivity towards syngas as reflected by both DFT and experimental data. However, Sn loading has to be carefully optimized since a relatively high amount of Sn can severely deter the catalytic performance.

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