Cargando…
Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters
Designing an economically viable catalyst that maintains high catalytic activity and stability is the key to unlock dry reforming of methane (DRM) as a primary strategy for biogas valorization. Ni/Al(2)O(3) catalysts have been widely used for this purpose; however, several modifications have been re...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8292677/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307298 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2021.694976 |
_version_ | 1783724872036253696 |
---|---|
author | Álvarez Moreno, Andrea Ramirez-Reina, Tomás Ivanova, Svetlana Roger, Anne-Cécile Centeno, Miguel Ángel Odriozola, José Antonio |
author_facet | Álvarez Moreno, Andrea Ramirez-Reina, Tomás Ivanova, Svetlana Roger, Anne-Cécile Centeno, Miguel Ángel Odriozola, José Antonio |
author_sort | Álvarez Moreno, Andrea |
collection | PubMed |
description | Designing an economically viable catalyst that maintains high catalytic activity and stability is the key to unlock dry reforming of methane (DRM) as a primary strategy for biogas valorization. Ni/Al(2)O(3) catalysts have been widely used for this purpose; however, several modifications have been reported in the last years in order to prevent coke deposition and deactivation of the samples. Modification of the acidity of the support and the addition of noble metal promoters are between the most reported strategies. Nevertheless, in the task of designing an active and stable catalyst for DRM, the selection of an appropriate noble metal promoter is turning more challenging owing to the lack of homogeneity of the different studies. Therefore, this research aims to compare Ru (0.50 and 2.0%) and Re (0.50 and 2.0%) as noble metal promoters for a Ni/MgAl(2)O(4) catalyst under the same synthesis and reaction conditions. Catalysts were characterized by XRF, BET, XRD, TPR, hydrogen chemisorption (H(2)-TPD), and dry reforming reaction tests. Results show that both promoters increase Ni reducibility and dispersion. However, Ru seems a better promoter for DRM since 0.50% of Ru increases the catalytic activity in 10% and leads to less coke deposition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8292677 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82926772021-07-22 Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters Álvarez Moreno, Andrea Ramirez-Reina, Tomás Ivanova, Svetlana Roger, Anne-Cécile Centeno, Miguel Ángel Odriozola, José Antonio Front Chem Chemistry Designing an economically viable catalyst that maintains high catalytic activity and stability is the key to unlock dry reforming of methane (DRM) as a primary strategy for biogas valorization. Ni/Al(2)O(3) catalysts have been widely used for this purpose; however, several modifications have been reported in the last years in order to prevent coke deposition and deactivation of the samples. Modification of the acidity of the support and the addition of noble metal promoters are between the most reported strategies. Nevertheless, in the task of designing an active and stable catalyst for DRM, the selection of an appropriate noble metal promoter is turning more challenging owing to the lack of homogeneity of the different studies. Therefore, this research aims to compare Ru (0.50 and 2.0%) and Re (0.50 and 2.0%) as noble metal promoters for a Ni/MgAl(2)O(4) catalyst under the same synthesis and reaction conditions. Catalysts were characterized by XRF, BET, XRD, TPR, hydrogen chemisorption (H(2)-TPD), and dry reforming reaction tests. Results show that both promoters increase Ni reducibility and dispersion. However, Ru seems a better promoter for DRM since 0.50% of Ru increases the catalytic activity in 10% and leads to less coke deposition. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8292677/ /pubmed/34307298 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2021.694976 Text en Copyright © 2021 Álvarez Moreno, Ramirez-Reina, Ivanova, Roger, Centeno and Odriozola. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Chemistry Álvarez Moreno, Andrea Ramirez-Reina, Tomás Ivanova, Svetlana Roger, Anne-Cécile Centeno, Miguel Ángel Odriozola, José Antonio Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title | Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title_full | Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title_fullStr | Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title_full_unstemmed | Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title_short | Bimetallic Ni–Ru and Ni–Re Catalysts for Dry Reforming of Methane: Understanding the Synergies of the Selected Promoters |
title_sort | bimetallic ni–ru and ni–re catalysts for dry reforming of methane: understanding the synergies of the selected promoters |
topic | Chemistry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8292677/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307298 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2021.694976 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alvarezmorenoandrea bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters AT ramirezreinatomas bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters AT ivanovasvetlana bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters AT rogerannececile bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters AT centenomiguelangel bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters AT odriozolajoseantonio bimetallicniruandnirecatalystsfordryreformingofmethaneunderstandingthesynergiesoftheselectedpromoters |