4.6 Article

Role of transalkylation reactions in the conversion of anisole over HZSM-5

期刊

APPLIED CATALYSIS A-GENERAL
卷 379, 期 1-2, 页码 172-181

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apcata.2010.03.018

关键词

Anisole; Phenolic compounds; HZSM-5; Methoxy group; Biomass conversion; Bio-oil upgrading

资金

  1. National Science Foundation EPSCOR [0814361]
  2. Department of Energy [DE-FG36GO88064]
  3. Oklahoma Bioenergy Center
  4. EPSCoR
  5. Office Of The Director [0814361] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conversion of anisole, a typical component of bio-oil, was studied over an HZSM-5 zeolite at varying space times (W/F), reaction temperatures, type of carrier gas, and concentration of water in the feed. Several bimolecular and unimolecular reactions are proposed to explain the evolution of products observed. The bimolecular reactions include the following transalkylation reactions: (a) anisoles to phenol and methylanisole; (b) phenol and methylanisole to cresols; (c) phenol and anisole to cresol and phenol; (d) methylanisole and cresol to phenol and xylenol. A pseudo first-order kinetic model based on these bimolecular reactions was found to describe well the observed product distribution as a function of W/F. It is observed that shape selectivity effects prevail over electrophilic substitution and thermodynamic equilibrium effects in the formation of methylanisole isomers. However, the opposite is true for the distribution of cresol isomers. The kinetic analysis indicates that the contribution of unimolecular reactions such as isomerization is much lower than that of bimolecular reactions. The carrier gas composition was found to have a moderate effect on catalyst activity. When H-2 was used as a carrier, catalyst stability showed a moderate improvement in comparison to the runs under He. However, a remarkable increase in catalytic activity was observed upon the addition of water in the feed. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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