4.6 Article

Sulfur resistance of Ce-Mn/TiO2 catalysts for low-temperature NH3-SCR

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.171846

关键词

NH3-SCR; sulfur resistance; Ce-Mn/TiO2 catalyst; catalyst synthesis

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Plan [2016YFC0303701]
  2. Beijing Nova Program [Z171100001117058]
  3. Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Project [Z161100001316010]
  4. Science Foundation of China University of Petroleum Beijing [2462018BJC004]
  5. State Key Laboratory of Petroleum and Petrochemical Pollution Control and Treatment [PPC2017015]
  6. National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture [1009735]
  7. McIntire Stennis [1009735]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ce-Mn/TiO2 catalyst prepared using a simple impregnation method demonstrated a better low-temperature selective catalytic reduction of NO with NH3 (NH3-SCR) activity in comparison with the son-gel method. The Ce-Mn/TiO2 catalyst loading with 20% Ce had the best low-temperature activity and achieved a NO conversion rate higher than 90% at 140-260 degrees C with a 99.7% NO conversion rate at 180 degrees C. The Ce-Nin/TiO2 catalyst only had a 6% NO conversion rate decrease after 100 ppm of SO2 was added to the stream. When SO2 was removed from the stream, the catalyst was able to recover completely. The crystal structure, morphology, textural properties and valence state of the metals involving the novel catalysts were investigated using X-ray diffraction, N-2 adsorption and desorption analysis, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy, respectively. The decrease of NH3-SCR performance in the presence of 100 ppm SO2 was due to the decrease of the surface area, change of the pore structure, the decrease of Ce4+ and Mn4- concentration and the formation of the sulfur phase chemicals which blocked the active sites and changed the valence status of the elements.

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