Cargando…

Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming

ABSTRACT: To focus on the influence of the intermetallic compound—oxide interface of Pd-based intermetallic phases in methanol steam reforming (MSR), a co-precipitation pathway has been followed to prepare and subsequently structurally and catalytically characterize a set of nanoparticulate Ga(2)O(3...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rameshan, Christoph, Lorenz, Harald, Armbrüster, Marc, Kasatkin, Igor, Klötzer, Bernhard, Götsch, Thomas, Ploner, Kevin, Penner, Simon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6191075/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30393448
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10562-018-2491-4
_version_ 1783363656311898112
author Rameshan, Christoph
Lorenz, Harald
Armbrüster, Marc
Kasatkin, Igor
Klötzer, Bernhard
Götsch, Thomas
Ploner, Kevin
Penner, Simon
author_facet Rameshan, Christoph
Lorenz, Harald
Armbrüster, Marc
Kasatkin, Igor
Klötzer, Bernhard
Götsch, Thomas
Ploner, Kevin
Penner, Simon
author_sort Rameshan, Christoph
collection PubMed
description ABSTRACT: To focus on the influence of the intermetallic compound—oxide interface of Pd-based intermetallic phases in methanol steam reforming (MSR), a co-precipitation pathway has been followed to prepare and subsequently structurally and catalytically characterize a set of nanoparticulate Ga(2)O(3)- and In(2)O(3)-supported GaPd(2) and InPd catalysts, respectively. To study the possible promoting effect of In(2)O(3), an In(2)O(3)-doped Ga(2)O(3)-supported GaPd(2) catalyst has also been examined. While, upon reduction, the same intermetallic compounds are formed, the structure of especially the Ga(2)O(3) support is strikingly different: rhombohedral and spinel-like Ga(2)O(3) phases, as well as hexagonal GaInO(3) and rhombohedral In(2)O(3) phases are observed locally on the materials prior to methanol steam reforming by high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. Overall, the structure, phase composition and morphology of the co-precipitated catalysts are much more complex as compared to the respective impregnated counterparts. However, this induces a beneficial effect in activity and CO(2) selectivity in MSR. Both Ga(2)O(3) and In(2)O(3) catalysts show a much higher activity, and in the case of GaPd(2)–Ga(2)O(3), a much higher CO(2) selectivity. The promoting effect of In(2)O(3) is also directly detectable, as the CO(2) selectivity of the co-precipitated supported Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) catalyst is much higher and comparable to the purely In(2)O(3)-supported material, despite the more complex structure and morphology. In all studied cases, no deactivation effects have been observed even after prolonged time-on-stream for 12 h, confirming the stability of the systems. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: The presence of a variety of distinct supported intermetallic InPd and GaPd(2) particle phases is not detrimental to activity/selectivity in methanol steam reforming as long as the appropriate intermetallic phases are present and they exhibit optimized intermetallic-support phase boundary dimensions. [Image: see text]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6191075
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61910752018-10-31 Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming Rameshan, Christoph Lorenz, Harald Armbrüster, Marc Kasatkin, Igor Klötzer, Bernhard Götsch, Thomas Ploner, Kevin Penner, Simon Catal Letters Article ABSTRACT: To focus on the influence of the intermetallic compound—oxide interface of Pd-based intermetallic phases in methanol steam reforming (MSR), a co-precipitation pathway has been followed to prepare and subsequently structurally and catalytically characterize a set of nanoparticulate Ga(2)O(3)- and In(2)O(3)-supported GaPd(2) and InPd catalysts, respectively. To study the possible promoting effect of In(2)O(3), an In(2)O(3)-doped Ga(2)O(3)-supported GaPd(2) catalyst has also been examined. While, upon reduction, the same intermetallic compounds are formed, the structure of especially the Ga(2)O(3) support is strikingly different: rhombohedral and spinel-like Ga(2)O(3) phases, as well as hexagonal GaInO(3) and rhombohedral In(2)O(3) phases are observed locally on the materials prior to methanol steam reforming by high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. Overall, the structure, phase composition and morphology of the co-precipitated catalysts are much more complex as compared to the respective impregnated counterparts. However, this induces a beneficial effect in activity and CO(2) selectivity in MSR. Both Ga(2)O(3) and In(2)O(3) catalysts show a much higher activity, and in the case of GaPd(2)–Ga(2)O(3), a much higher CO(2) selectivity. The promoting effect of In(2)O(3) is also directly detectable, as the CO(2) selectivity of the co-precipitated supported Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) catalyst is much higher and comparable to the purely In(2)O(3)-supported material, despite the more complex structure and morphology. In all studied cases, no deactivation effects have been observed even after prolonged time-on-stream for 12 h, confirming the stability of the systems. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: The presence of a variety of distinct supported intermetallic InPd and GaPd(2) particle phases is not detrimental to activity/selectivity in methanol steam reforming as long as the appropriate intermetallic phases are present and they exhibit optimized intermetallic-support phase boundary dimensions. [Image: see text] Springer US 2018-08-03 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6191075/ /pubmed/30393448 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10562-018-2491-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Rameshan, Christoph
Lorenz, Harald
Armbrüster, Marc
Kasatkin, Igor
Klötzer, Bernhard
Götsch, Thomas
Ploner, Kevin
Penner, Simon
Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title_full Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title_fullStr Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title_full_unstemmed Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title_short Impregnated and Co-precipitated Pd–Ga(2)O(3), Pd–In(2)O(3) and Pd–Ga(2)O(3)–In(2)O(3) Catalysts: Influence of the Microstructure on the CO(2) Selectivity in Methanol Steam Reforming
title_sort impregnated and co-precipitated pd–ga(2)o(3), pd–in(2)o(3) and pd–ga(2)o(3)–in(2)o(3) catalysts: influence of the microstructure on the co(2) selectivity in methanol steam reforming
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6191075/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30393448
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10562-018-2491-4
work_keys_str_mv AT rameshanchristoph impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT lorenzharald impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT armbrustermarc impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT kasatkinigor impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT klotzerbernhard impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT gotschthomas impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT plonerkevin impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming
AT pennersimon impregnatedandcoprecipitatedpdga2o3pdin2o3andpdga2o3in2o3catalystsinfluenceofthemicrostructureontheco2selectivityinmethanolsteamreforming