4.8 Article

Steam reforming of methanol over Cu/ZrO2/CeO2 catalysts:: a kinetic study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
卷 230, 期 2, 页码 464-475

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2004.12.020

关键词

steam reforming of methanol; copper; zirconia; ceria; N2O chemisorption; long-term stability; CO formation; kinetic model; reverse water-gas shift reaction; methanol decomposition; activation energy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Steam reforming of methanol (SRM) was investigated over Cu/ZrO2/CeO2 (CZC) catalysts prepared via a novel synthetic method based on coprecipitation and polymer templating. Structural characterization of the samples was performed by N-2 adsorption-desorption, N2O decomposition, and X-ray diffraction. The variation of the Cu loading resulted in all increased Cu crystallite size and a decreased specific surface area of the active particles. Catalytic investigations were carried out in a fixed-bed reactor at 10(5) Pa, with a CH3OH:H2O ratio of 1:1. The samples with Cu contents higher than 5% exhibited good long-term stabilities and low CO levels during continuous operation. The kinetic model suggested for the transformation involved the reverse water-gas shift (RWGS) and methanol decomposition (MD), in addition to the SRM reaction. Kinetic measurements were made in the temperature range of 503-573 K, and the experimental results could be well simulated. The highest methanol conversions and the lowest CO levels were observed in the temperature range of 523-543 K. The apparent activation energies for the individual reactions were found to depend oil the Cu content of the catalyst. Since the influence of mass transport limitations on the kinetic data Could be excluded. it was established that the variation of the Cu concentration in the precursor material altered the microstructure of the Cu particles and. accordingly. the active Cu Surface. which resulted in the formation of significantly different catalysts. (c) 2005 Published by Elsevier Inc.

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

4.8
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