4.8 Article

Dissociative adsorption of methane on the Cu and Zn doped (111) surface of CeO2

期刊

APPLIED CATALYSIS B-ENVIRONMENTAL
卷 197, 期 -, 页码 324-336

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2016.04.004

关键词

Methane activation; Density functional theory; CeO2; Transition metal doping

资金

  1. European FP7 NMP project BIOGO [604296]
  2. COST ACTION CM1104 Reducible oxides: structure and function
  3. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) Irish Centre for High-end Computing (ICHEC)
  4. SFI at Tyndall

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of economical heterogeneous catalysts for the activation of methane is a major challenge for the chemical industry. Screening potential candidates becomes more feasible using rational catalyst design to understand the activity of potential catalysts for CH4 activation. The focus of the present paper is the use of density functional theory to examine and elucidate the properties of doped CeO2. We dope with Cu and Zn transition metals having variable oxidation state (Cu), and a single oxidation state (Zn), and study the activation of methane. Zn is a divalent dopant and Cu can have a +1 or +2 oxidation state. Both Cu and Zn dopants have an oxidation state of +2 after incorporation into the CeO2 (111) surface; however a Hubbard +U correction (+U = 7) on the Cu 3d states is required to maintain this oxidation state when the surface interacts with adsorbed species. Dissociation of methane is found to occur locally at the dopant cations, and is thermodynamically and kinetically more favorable on Zn-doped CeO2 than Cu-doped CeO2. The origins of this lie with the Zn(II) dopant moving towards a square pyramidal geometry in the sub surface layer which facilitates the formation of two-coordinated surface oxygen atoms, that are more beneficial for methane activation on a reducible oxide surface. These findings can aid in rational experimental catalyst design for further exploration in methane activation processes. (C) 2016 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

4.8
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