4.6 Article

Carbon Dioxide Reforming of Methane over Ni Supported SiO2: Influence of the Preparation Method on the Resulting Structural Properties and Catalytic Activity

Journal

CATALYSTS
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/catal10070795

Keywords

reforming of methane; carbon dioxide; nickel; stability; complexed impregnation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21908182, 21706218, 21901214]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province [2019JQ-920, 2020JM-643]
  3. Special Scientific Research Project of Shaanxi Education Department [18JK1194]
  4. Science Research Foundation of Xijing University [XJ17T01, XJ18T03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ni-C/SiO(2)and Ni-G/SiO(2)catalysts were prepared by a complexed-impregnation method using citric acid and glycine as complexing agents, respectively. Ni/SiO(2)was also prepared by the conventional incipient impregnation method. All the catalysts were comparatively tested for carbon dioxide reforming of methane (CDR) at P = 1.0 atm, T = 750 degrees C, CO2/CH4= 1.0, and GHSV = 60,000 mL center dot g(-1)center dot h(-1). The results showed that Ni-C/SiO(2)and Ni-G/SiO(2)exhibited better CDR performance, especially regarding stability, than Ni/SiO2. The conversions of CH(4)and CO(2)were kept constant above 82% and 87% after 20 h of reaction over Ni-C/SiO(2)and Ni-G/SiO(2)while they were decreased from 81% and 88% to 56% and 59%, respectively, over the Ni/SiO2. The characterization results of the catalysts before and after the reaction showed that the particle size and the distribution of Ni, as well as the interactions between Ni and the support were significantly influenced by the preparation method. As a result, an excellent resistance to the coking deposition and the anti-sintering of Ni was obtained over the Ni-C/SiO(2)and Ni-G/SiO2, leading to a highly active and stable CDR performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available