4.6 Article

Effective Way to Control the Performance of a Ceria-Based DeNOx Catalyst with Improved Alkali Resistance: Acid-Base Adjusting

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 119, 期 27, 页码 15077-15084

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b00793

关键词

-

资金

  1. Changjiang Scholar Incentive Program (Ministry of Education, China)
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC-51278458]
  3. National High Tech Research and Development Program (863) of China [2011AA060801]
  4. Technological research for public welfare of Zhejiang Province [2012C23024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Compared with V2O5W-O-3/TiO2, the ceria catalyst supported on sulfated zirconia (referred to as CeSZ) shows a superior alkali resistance for selective catalytic reduction of NO in flue gases. It reveals an unexpected result that a moderate amount of potassium (normally considered as SCR poisons) could even enhance the activity of CeSZ catalyst. To investigate this exceptional phenomenon, we studied the surface acid-base properties of CeSZ catalysts with different amounts of K and their influences on SCR performances. Although K resulted in a sharp decrease in Bronsted acid sites, the total acidity, especially strong acidity, barely changed when K/Ce was less than 0.4. It was proposed that a small amount of potassium could initially alter some Bronsted acid sites to Lewis ones, therefore retaining the majority of total acidity. Moreover, increased surface basicity due to K depositing led to an enhancement in NO chemisorption and oxidation, which is beneficial to the SCR process via the reaction of NO2 and NOx ad-species with adsorbed NH3 species. This explains why the SCR catalytic activity was improved at lower temperature for CeSZ catalysts after K depositing. Therefore, the catalytic activity and reaction temperature window of CeSZ catalyst could be controlled by simply tuning the surface acid/base sites, which may give some inspiration to improve the catalytic activity and poisoning tolerance.

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

4.6
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