Next Article in Journal
Synthesis of NaOH-Modified TiOF2 and Its Enhanced Visible Light Photocatalytic Performance on RhB
Next Article in Special Issue
Promotion of Ca-Co Bifunctional Catalyst/Sorbent with Yttrium for Hydrogen Production in Modified Chemical Looping Steam Methane Reforming Process
Previous Article in Journal
The Differentiating Polarization Curve Technique for the Tafel Parameter Estimation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Steam Reforming of Bio-Compounds with Auto-Reduced Nickel Catalyst
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Improved H2 Production by Ethanol Steam Reforming over Sc2O3-Doped Co-ZnO Catalysts

Department of Chemistry, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Physical Chemistry for Solid Surfaces and National Engineering Laboratory for Green Chemical Productions of Alcohols-Ethers-Esters, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Catalysts 2017, 7(8), 241; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal7080241
Submission received: 2 July 2017 / Revised: 15 August 2017 / Accepted: 16 August 2017 / Published: 18 August 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Reforming Catalysts)

Abstract

:
H2 production by catalytically ethanol steam reforming (ESR) is an effective and prospective method for the application of fuel cells. However, the catalysts’ desirable activity and stability remains an unprecedented challenge. Herein, a type of Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalyst was developed by a co-precipitation method. The so-constructed Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst exhibited a superb catalytic performance compared with Co-ZnO, giving a STY(H2) as high as 1.099 mol·h−1·g-cat−1 (data taken 100 h after the reaction started). In comparison, the pristine Co-ZnO catalyst only afforded a STY(H2) of 0.684 mol·h−1·g-cat−1 under identical reaction conditions. Characterization results revealed that the Sc2O3 dopant strengthened the electronic interaction between Co species and ZnO, which was in favour of elevating the reduction temperature of Co oxides and boosting the dispersion of the Con+ (n = 1 or 2). The introduction of Sc2O3 induced the formation of O2− and OH. All of these effects effectively inhibited the sintering of active Co species and markedly improved the activity and operating stability of the catalyst.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Ethanol is an important candidate as a chemical carrier of hydrogen for fuel cell applications. Not only is it less hazardous than methanol, it can be also produced from a variety of biomass sources. Therefore, much attention is recently focused on the development of suitable catalysts for steam reforming of ethanol (ESR; C2H5OH + 3H2O → 2CO2 + 6H2) [1,2]. A number of reported catalysts have demonstrated good performance in terms of activity and selectivity for the ethanol steam reforming (ESR) reaction, i.e., Rh (or Pt or Pd)/CeO2–ZrO2 [3,4], Ni–Rh/CeO2 [5], Ir/CeO2 [6], Pt/CeZrO2 [7], Co/ZnO [8,9], Co/Al2O3 (/SiO2 or /MgO) [10], Co/ZrO2 (or /CeO2) [11,12,13], Pt–Co/ZnO [14], Ni/Y2O3 (or /ZrO2) [15,16,17], Ni/Mg–Al mixed oxide [18,19], and Ni/ZrO2–Yb2O3 [20]. Although noble metal-based catalysts showed excellent catalytic activities for ESR, their application on a large scale was limited due to scarcity and expense.
In this regard, the development of non-precious metal-based catalysts is imperative for chemists. ZnO possesses the eminent catalytic reactivity of ESR. The incorporation of Co to ZnO apparently improves its performance [21], and the low cost and excellent performance of the Co-ZnO catalyst has attracted considerable attention and been widely reported. However, although some promising results have been obtained on the ESR reaction, there are still several problems to be solved, such as low stability and high reaction temperature. The results of Song et al. [11,12] indicated that the catalyst deactivation was due to the carbon deposition and cobalt sintering. Introduction of ceria improved activity and durability because of the higher oxygen mobility of ceria. The addition of sodium could evidently enhance the catalytic performance of Co-ZnO, which was attributed to reduction in coke formation [9]. In addition, the reactivity of Co-ZnO catalysts could be further increased by impregnation of Pt [14].
Based on the aforementioned summarization, catalyst stability is one of the most crucial challenges in the development of catalysts for producing hydrogen from ESR. Catalyst deactivation is generally attributed to the carbon deposition, sintering, and oxidation of metal particles [1,13,22,23,24,25,26,27]. Carbon deposition in the form of filaments or whiskers is often found in addition to amorphous carbon.
It is well known that the radius of Sc3+ (0.073 nm) is close to that of Zn2+ (0.074 nm). Thus, Sc2O3 may be readily embedded into the ZnO crystal lattice by ion-doped method in order to modify the crystal structure of ZnO and achieve more stable composites. With these ideas in mind, a series of Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalysts were prepared. The physicochemical properties of the catalysts were examined by Transmission electron microscopy (TEM), X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET), and H2-temperature-programmed reduction (H2-TPR). The ESR was performed to investigate the effect of Sc2O3 doping. After that, we discussed the possible promotional effects of Sc2O3 on the ESR performance of the catalysts.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Catalyst Performance

The reactivity of ESR (data taken 24 h after the reaction started, similarly hereinafter) over a series of Co1.25Zn1Sck (molar ratio) catalysts was optimized. The results (Figure 1) showed that CO2, CO, and CH4 were the main carbon-containing products and the yield of ethyl ether was negligible. Under the reaction conditions of 0.5 MPa, 723 K, feed-gas composition of C2H5OH/H2O/N2 = 15/45/40 (molar ratio), and GHSV = 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1, the five catalysts Co1.25Zn1Sck with varied k values at 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 afforded X(EtOH) of 15.8%, 16.6%, 14.9%, 8.6%, and 5.6% with corresponding STY(H2) of 0.951, 1.037, 0.931, 0.668 and 0.513 mol·h−1·g-cat−1, respectively. It is clear that when the Sc/Zn molar ratio (k) was set at 0.3, the catalyst presented high X(EtOH) and STY(H2), and low S(CO) and S(CH4).
Next, we investigated the Co/Zn molar ratio (i) effect on the reactivity of ESR. The results are showed in Figure 2. The four catalysts CoiZn1Sc0.3 with varied i values at 1.25, 2, 2.5, and 3 gave X(EtOH) of 16.6%, 19.1%, 18.5%, and 15.9% with corresponding STY(H2) of 1.037, 1.151, 1.107 and 0.918 mol·h−1·g-cat−1, respectively, under the aforementioned reaction conditions. Obviously, the CoiZn1Sc0.3 catalyst with i = 2 could show high X(EtOH) and STY(H2), and low S(CO) and S(CH4).
The ESR performance of optimal Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst was then evaluated under the aforementioned optimized reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa, 723 K, feed-gas composition EtOH/H2O/N2 = 15/45/40, and GHSV = 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1. The results (data taken 100 h after the reaction started) showed that the X(EtOH) reached 16.6%, with S(CO2), S(CO) and S(CH4) of 80.6%, 7.9% and 11.5%, and the corresponding STY(H2) of 1.099 mol·h−1·g-cat−1. This STY(H2) value was 1.6 times that (0.684 mol·h−1·g-cat−1) of the Sc2O3-free counterpart Co2Zn1 under identical reaction conditions (Table 1). It has been reported that a 18.2% X(EtOH) was obtained over the Ni1.25Zr1Yb0.8 catalyst, affording 83.0% S(CO2), 11.4% S(CO), and 5.6% S(CH4) [20]. These values were slightly superior to those on the Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst, but the STY(H2) on Ni1.25Zr1Yb0.8 was much lower than that on Co2Zn1Sc0.3. The catalyst containing noble metals such as RhFe/Ca-Al2O3 exhibited attracting X(EtOH). However, it gave the byproduct of S(CH4) up to 39.7% [28]. More importantly, the STY(H2) was far lower than the aforementioned catalysts. Generally speaking, the Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst possessed the superior reactivity of ESR.
Heat treatment at higher temperatures was performed to investigate the thermal resistance of Co2Zn1 and Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalysts. Typically, the thermal resistance of the catalyst was investigated under the reaction conditions of 0.5 MPa, EtOH/H2O/N2 = 15/45/40, GHSV = 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1, and T ranging at 723–873 K. During the 90 h on stream, the catalysts were treated at high T at 823 and 873 K for 12 h, and then cooled down to 723 K for the ESR. The results are shown in Figure 3. To our surprise, the X(EtOH) fell to 0% over the Co2Zn1 catalyst. In contrast to this, the X(EtOH) on the catalyst Co2Zn1Sc0.3 still maintained at a level of 12.6% after the whole process of heat treatment. The finding indicated that the catalyst Co2Zn1Sc0.3 considerably improved the thermal resistance for ESR compared to the pristine Co-ZnO catalyst.

2.2. TEM Characterization

Figure 4 shows the TEM images and the corresponding particle distribution of as-reduced and spent catalysts of Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1. The spent catalysts were run through the ESR for 24 h under the reaction conditions of 0.5 MPa, 823 K, feed-gas composition of C2H5OH/H2O/N2 = 15/45/40, and GHSV = 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1. It can be seen that the Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst exhibited excellent dispersion, with a wide size distribution from 8 to 20 nm and a mean size of 13.5 nm. For the reduced Co2Zn1 catalyst, the particle size ranged between 9 nm and 30 nm, with a mean size of 17.2 nm. It could be deduced that introducing the Sc2O3 to Co-ZnO catalyst was in favor of boosting the dispersion of the active species. On the spent Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst, the observed nanoparticles were fairly uniform in shape and size. The particle size was estimated to be in the range of 12–28 nm, with a mean size of 19.1 nm. In contrast, the particle size of the spent Co2Zn1 catalyst was in the range of 20–75 nm, accompanied with the formation of an appreciable amount of carbon-nanotubes or carbon-nanofibers. It could be concluded that the addition of Sc2O3 to Co-ZnO inhibited the growth of the particles to some extent, and thus effectively suppressed the sintering and deactivation of the catalyst. These results were in line with the surface area values of the two spent catalysts, as well as the ESR reactivity over the two catalysts (Table 1 and Figure 3).

2.3. XRD and XPS Characterization

The XRD patterns, which are used to identify the phase structure and crystallite size of the materials of the reduced and spent catalysts of Co2Zn1 and Co-ZnO doped with Sc2O3, are shown in Figure 5. No matter whether the samples were reduced or spent, pure Co-ZnO catalyst or doped with Sc2O3, the characteristic diffraction of the ZnO appeared at 2θ = 31.7°, 34.4°, 36.2°, 47.5°, 56.5°, 62.8°, and 67.9° in all the samples. Except for several characteristic diffraction peaks corresponding to ZnO, the peaks located at 2θ = 44.2°, 51.5° and 2θ = 36.8°, 59.4°, 65.2° were ascribed to metallic Co and Co3O4 for the reduced Co2Zn1 catalyst, respectively. As for the Co2Zn1Sc0.3 catalyst, the main Co species are in the form of CoO with the diffraction lines at 2θ = 42.4° and 61.5°. The results indicated that the Sc2O3-doping had a positive effect on the crystal phase of Co-ZnO catalyst, which would be favorable to stabilize Con+ (n = 1 or 2) with high oxidation states, thus effectively refraining from sintering. On the other hand, the XRD patterns of the spent catalysts were similar to those of as-reduced ones, except for the sharper peak shape. The Co and Zn components existed mainly in the forms of metallic Co and ZnO for the catalysts after reaction. The particle size of Co and ZnO in the two spent catalysts was estimated according to the Scherrer’s equation. The average particle sizes of Co and ZnO were 3.5 and 26.9 nm for Co2Zn1Sc0.3, and 19.6 and 37.2 nm for Co2Zn1, respectively. The results showed a significant effect on the dispersion of Co species with the addition of small amounts of Sc2O3.
XPS analysis is a powerful way of distinguishing the chemical environment and the change in content of surface species. The XPS profile of the spent catalysts displayed that the signals assigned to the Co, Zn, Sc, and O atoms were observed on the surface of the Sc2O3-containing and Sc2O3-free catalysts. In the Co 2p XPS profile (Figure 6A) of the Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalyst, the main peak shifted to a lower binding energy compared with the Sc2O3-free counterpart. A similar situation was happened on the Zn 2p XPS profile (Figure 6B). These findings implied that the electronic density on Co atoms increased after Sc2O3 doping [29,30], which was in favor of the adsorption and activation of the reactants or intermediates [31,32,33]. Sc species in the Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalysts existed in the form of Sc2O3 based on the Sc 2p XPS profile (Figure 6C).
Figure 6A displays the Co 2p XPS profile taken on the used catalysts of Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1. It displays a main line and a satellite for Co 2p XPS profile. The observed Co(2p3/2) and Co(2p1/2) peaks appeared at about 780.9 eV and 796.6 eV, respectively. According to the literature [34], the Co 2p XPS profile could be divided into three peaks. They were Cox0, CoO and Co(OH)2 with the corresponding Con+(2p3/2) B.E. values at 778.0 eV, 780.4 eV and 782.0 eV, respectively [35,36,37]. The binding energies of Con+(2p3/2) for the reference compounds, along with their relative intensities, are given in Table 2. From the above analysis, it could be concluded that the doping of small amounts of Sc2O3 into the Co2Zn1 catalyst led to lessening significantly the mol % of Co0 species (Figure 6A and Table 2). This is in agreement with the XRD results shown in Figure 5.
As seen in the O 1s XPS profile depicted in Figure 6D, the peaks located at 530.4 eV, 531.6 eV and 532.3 eV were ascribed to oxide anion (O2−), adsorbed oxygen (Oads) and hydroxide anion (OH), successively, on the surface of the spent catalysts of Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 [31,38]. The content of the O species was calculated and presented in Table 3. The mol % of O2− and OH species arrived 33.9% and 44.6% on the surface of Co2Zn1Sc0.3 respectively, being 1.22 and 1.44 times of the corresponding values (27.6% and 35.9%) of the compared Co2Zn1 catalyst. However, the content of Oads (21.5%) on the surface of the spent Co2Zn1Sc0.3 was evidently lower than the corresponding values (36.5%) of the compared Co2Zn1 catalyst. These results indicated that O2− and OH species favored the H2 production based on our experimental results, which needs further research in the future.

2.4. H2-TPR

The H2-TPR profiles of Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 catalysts are illustrated in Figure 7. The H2-TPR curve of Co2Zn1 catalyst (Figure 7b) showed the two peaks at 593 K and 791 K, successively. The former may be due to the reduction of Co2O3 to Co3O4, or further to CoO. The latter is likely attributed to the reduction of Co3O4 or CoO to Co0 [39,40], which interacted strongly with ZnO surface, and, thus, were difficult to be reduced at lower temperatures. The addition of the appropriate amount of Sc2O3 to the Co2Zn1 host further strengthened the interaction between Con+ species and the Znx-Scy-Oz compound-oxide surface, leading to an elevating reduction-temperature of those Con+ species (with the main TPR peak elevating to 933 K from 791 K) (Figure 7a), and stabilizing and anchoring Con+ particles. This result was in line with the aforementioned results of XPS observation and the thermal stability test of the catalysts.

3. Discussion

It is well known that most of the catalyst deactivation of ESR is attributed to the active metal sintering and the deposition of various type of carbon on the surface of the catalyst [41,42]. How to solve these problems is the main challenge in this field. In this work, we apply the ion-doped method to the catalyst preparation. Based on the ionic radius of Sc3+ and Zn2+ being similar to each other, Sc3+ could easily enter into the ZnO lattice. Schottky defects in the form of cationic vacancies would be generated simultaneously for reaching charge compensation. Hence, Con+ can be immobilized at the surface cation-sites. This result is in accordance with the former work of our teams [43]. This will be conducive to suppressing the agglomeration of the Con+ species and maintaining the high Con+ dispersion between the metal Co and ZnO though electronic effect, thus markedly improving the activity and thermal durability of the catalyst. The transformation of O species was also responsible for the excellent catalytic performance, which needs in-depth discussion. These points are proved by the results of the characterizations, and all of the above factors will be responsible for the enhancement effect of the Sc2O3 introduction.

4. Experimental

4.1. Catalyst Preparation

The catalysts Co-ZnO and Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO were prepared by a co-precipitation method. Typically, an appropriate amount of Co(NO3)2·6H2O and Zn(NO3)2·6H2O (Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China), and Sc(NO3)3·6H2O (Diyang Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China) were dissolved in deionized water together. The required amount of K2CO3 (Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China) was made to aqueous solution in a beak and put it into a water bath at 353 K. The former solution was rapidly added into the latter until the pH ≈ 7 was achieved. The suspension was continuously stirred for another 30 min and then filtered. The precipitate was washed five times, then dried at 383 K for 12 h and calcined in a muffle oven at 623 K for 2 h. Co-ZnO was prepared in a similar way. All samples were pressed, crushed, and sieved to a size of 20–40 mesh for the activity testing.

4.2. Catalytic Evaluation

ESR reactions were tested in a fixed-bed continuous-flow reactor combined with gas chromatograph (GC). The catalyst was reduced at 623 K for 5 h under purified H2 stream. The ESR reaction was performed under the reaction condition of 0.5 MPa, 723 K, and a feed gas composition of C2H5OH/H2O/N2 = 15/45/40 (molar ratio) (Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China), and GHSV = 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1. The feed contained C2H5OH, and H2O was introduced into the reactor by a syringe pump (Series II Pump, 10 mL Heads) with N2 as the internal standard and dilution gas. The C2H5OH and H2O mixed liquid was vaporized at 473 K before access to the reactor.
Prior to entering the sampling valve of the GC, the products passed through a low constant temperature bath (DC-2006) to separate liquid products. An online GC (GC-2014C, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan), equipped with a thermal conductivity detector (TCD) (TDX-01 column) and with He as carrier gas, was used to separate N2, CO, CH4 and CO2. H2 was detected online by TCD using another GC-2014C (TDX-01 column) and with Ar as carrier gas.
Analysis of the liquid products showed that ethyl ether could be ignored and CO2, CO, and CH4 were the main products. Thus, ethanol conversion (symbolized as X(EtOH)) (Equation (1)), selectivity of CO2, CO, and CH4 (symbolized as S(CO2), S(CO), and S(CH4)) (Equations (2)–(4)), and H2 space-time-yield (symbolized as STY(H2)) (Equation (5)) could be calculated through a N2-internal standard method according to the following equations:
X C H 3 C H 2 O H = n C O 2 + n C O + n C H 4 2 n C H 3 C H 2 O H i n = F N 2 f C O 2 A C O 2 + F N 2 f C O A C O + F N 2 f C H 4 A C H 4 44800 A N 2 n C H 3 C H 2 O H i n
S C O 2 = f C O 2 A C O 2 f C O 2 A C O 2 + f C O A C O + f C H 4 A C H 4
S C O = f C O A C O f C O 2 A C O 2 + f C O A C O + f C H 4 A C H 4
S C H 4 = f C H 4 A C H 4 f C O 2 A C O 2 + f C O A C O + f C H 4 A C H 4
S T Y H 2 = n H 2 m c a t . = 60 F N 2 f H 2 A H 2 22400 A N 2 m c a t .
where, F N 2 represents the flow of N2 (mL·min−1), n C H 3 C H 2 O H i n represents the molar of liquid feed (ethanol and H2O) inputting to the reactor, n represents the molar of the production (such as CO, CO2, CH4, etc.), f’ represents the molar calibration factor, A represents the peak area in GC; mcat represents the catalyst weight loaded.

4.3. Characterizations

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) measurements were performed on the Technai F30 and F20 electron microscope (FEI Corp., Hillsboro, OR, USA). XRD measurements were carried out on an X’Pert PRO X-ray diffractometer (Ultima IV, Rigaku, Tokyo, Japan) with Cu Kαα1 = 0.15406 nm, λα2 = 0.15443 nm) radiation. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (PHI Quantum 2000 Scanning ESCA Microprobe, PHI, Eden Prairie, MN, USA) measurements were done on a VG ESCA LAB MK-2 apparatus with Al-Kα radiation (15 kV, 25 W, hν = 1486.6 eV) under ultrahigh vacuum (10−7 Pa), calibrated internally by the carbon deposit C(1s) (Eb = 284.6 eV). The specific surface area was determined by N2 adsorption using a Micromeritics ASAP 2020 system (Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA). Tests of H2-temperature-programmed reduction (H2-TPR) and H2-temperature-programmed desorption (H2-TPD) of the catalysts were conducted on a fixed-bed continuous-flow microreactor, and change of hydrogen-signal was monitored by an on-line GC (Shimadzu GC-8A, Kyoto, Japan) with a TCD.

5. Conclusions

Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalyst for H2 production by ESR was prepared. The optimized Co2Zn1Sc0.3 exhibited the highest EtOH conversion and STY of H2. The H2 STY was 1.099 mol·h−1·g-cat−1, 1.6 times higher than that on the Co-ZnO catalyst without Sc2O3 doping under the optimal reaction conditions. XPS and TPR results disclosed that the electronic interaction between Co and ZnO after Sc2O3 addition was strengthened, which was beneficial to the dispersion of the Con+. The introduction of Sc2O3 to Co-ZnO also promoted the formation of O2− and OH, which would be conducive to H2 production, but it needs the further investigation. The present work may contribute to the precise design of catalysts for ESR to produce H2 with desirable activity and better durability.
It must be admitted that the improved performance has been achieved over the present Sc2O3-doped Co-ZnO catalyst, but the selectivity to CO and CH4 is still high, especially when the ESR is run at the reaction temperature higher than 723 K. It is well known that CO is poison to the anode of the fuel cell and the formation of CH4 sacrifices the selectivity of H2. Therefore, more efforts are necessary to fabricate novel catalysts that can efficiently generate more H2 and minimize CO selectivity. In particular, we must consider the catalysts that minimize undesirable products at higher temperature operations in future work.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (21473145 and 91545115), and the Program for Innovative Research Team in Chinese Universities (No. IRT_14R31).

Author Contributions

Hongbin Zhang conceived and designed the experiments; Xuelian Liang performed the experiments; Xinping Shi and Fanfan Zhang analyzed the data; Yuyang Li contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools; Xuelian Liang and Youzhu Yuan wrote the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Mattos, L.V.; Jacobs, G.; Davis, B.H.; Noronha, F.B. Production of hydrogen from ethanol: Review of reaction mechanism and catalyst deactivation. Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 4094–4123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ni, M.; Leung, D.Y.C.; Leung, M.K.H. A review on reforming bio-ethanol for hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2007, 32, 3238–3247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Breen, J.P.; Burch, R.; Coleman, H.M. Metal-catalysed steam reforming of ethanol in the production of hydrogen for fuel cell applications. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2002, 39, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Auprêtre, F.; Descorme, C.; Duprez, D. Bio-ethanol catalytic steam reforming over supported metal catalysts. Catal. Commun. 2002, 3, 263–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kugai, J.; Subramani, V.; Song, C.; Engelhard, M.H.; Chin, Y.H. Effects of nanocrystalline CeO2 supports on the properties and performance of Ni-Rh bimetallic catalyst for oxidative steam reforming of ethanol. J. Catal. 2006, 238, 430–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cai, W.; Wang, F.; Zhan, E.; Van Veen, A.C.; Mirodatos, C.; Shen, W. Hydrogen production from ethanol over Ir/CeO2 catalysts: A comparative study of steam reforming, partial oxidation and oxidative steam reforming. J. Catal. 2008, 257, 96–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. De Lima, S.M.; Silva, A.M.; Graham, U.M.; Jacobs, G.; Davis, B.H.; Mattos, L.V.; Noronha, F.B. Ethanol decomposition and steam reforming of ethanol over CeZrO2 and Pt/CeZrO2 catalyst: Reaction mechanism and deactivation. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2009, 352, 95–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Llorca, J.; Piscina, P.R.; Dalmon, J.A.; Sales, J.; Homs, N. CO-free hydrogen from steam reforming of bioethanol over ZnO-supported cobalt catalysts: Effect of the metallic precursor. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2003, 43, 355–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Llorca, J.; Homs, N.; Sales, J.; Fierro, J.L.; Piscina, P.R. Effect of sodium addition on the performance of Co-ZnO-based catalysts for hydrogen production from bioethanol. J. Catal. 2004, 222, 470–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Batista, M.S.; Santos, R.K.S.; Assaf, E.M.; Assaf, J.M.; Ticianelli, E.A. Characterization of the activity and stability of supported cobalt catalysts for the steam reforming of ethanol. J. Power Sources 2003, 124, 99–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Song, H.; Zhang, L.; Watson, R.B.; Braden, D.; Ozkan, U.S. Investigation of bio-ethanol steam reforming over cobalt-based catalysts. Catal. Today 2007, 129, 346–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Song, H.; Ozkan, U.S. Ethanol steam reforming over Co-based catalysts: Role of oxygen mobility. J. Catal. 2009, 261, 66–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. De Lima, S.M.; da Silva, A.M.; da Costa, L.O.O.; Graham, U.M.; Jacobs, G.; Davis, B.H.; Mattos, L.V.; Noronha, F.B. Study of catalyst deactivation and reaction mechanism of steam reforming, partial oxidation, and oxidative steam reforming of ethanol over Co/CeO2 catalyst. J. Catal. 2009, 268, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chiou, J.Y.Z.; Wang, W.Y.; Yang, S.Y.; Lai, C.L.; Huang, H.H.; Wang, C.B. Ethanol steam reforming to produce hydrogen over Co/ZnO and PtCo/ZnO catalysts. Catal. Lett. 2013, 143, 501–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bellido, J.D.A.; Assaf, E.M. Nickel catalysts supported on ZrO2, Y2O3-stabilized ZrO2 and CaO-stabilized ZrO2 for the steam reforming of ethanol: Effect of the support and nickel load. J. Power Sources 2008, 177, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rossetti, I.; Biffi, C.; Bianchi, C.L.; Nichele, V.; Signoretto, M.; Menegazzo, F.; Finocchio, E.; Ramis, G.; Di Michele, A. Ni/SiO2 and Ni/ZrO2 catalysts for the steam reforming of ethanol. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2012, 117–118, 384–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Akiyama, M.; Oki, Y.; Nagai, M. Steam reforming of ethanol over carburized alkali-doped nickel on zirconia and various supports for hydrogen production. Catal. Today 2012, 181, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Coleman, L.J.I.; Epling, W.; Hudgins, R.R.; Croiset, E. Ni/Mg-Al mixed oxide catalyst for the steam reforming of ethanol. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2009, 363, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Galetti, A.E.; Barroso, M.N.; Gomez, M.F.; Arrua, L.A.; Monzón, A.; Abello, M.C. Promotion of Ni/MgAl2O4 catalysts with rare earths for the ethanol steam reforming reaction. Catal. Lett. 2012, 142, 1461–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hou, J.; Liu, Z.M.; Lin, G.D.; Zhang, H.B. Novel Ni-ZrO2 catalyst doped with Yb2O3 for ethanol steam reforming. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39, 1315–1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lin, J.Y.; Chen, L.W.; Choong, C.K.S.; Zhong, Z.Y.; Huang, L. Molecular catalysis for the steam reforming of ethanol. Sci. China Chem. 2015, 58, 60–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vargas, J.C.; Libs, S.; Roger, A.C.; Kiennemann, A. Study of Ce-Zr-Co fluorite-type oxide as catalysts for hydrogen production by steam reforming of bioethanol. Catal. Today 2005, 107–108, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Erdőhelyi, A.; Raskó, J.; Kecskés, T.; Tóth, M.; Dömök, M.; Baán, K. Hydrogen formation in ethanol reforming on supported noble metal catalysts. Catal. Today 2006, 116, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Frusteri, F.; Freni, S.; Chiodo, V.; Donato, S.; Bonura, G.; Cavallaro, S. Steam and auto-thermal reforming of bio-ethanol over MgO and CeO2 Ni supported catalysts. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2006, 31, 2193–2199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Romero-Sarria, F.; Vargas, J.C.; Roger, A.; Kiennemann, A. Hydrogen production by steam reforming of ethanol: Study of mixed oxide catalysts Ce2Zr1.5Me0.5O8: Comparison of Ni/Co and effect of Rh. Catal. Today 2008, 133, 149–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Galetti, A.E.; Gomez, M.F.; Arrua, L.A.; Marchi, A.J.; Abello, M.C. Study of CuCoZnAl oxide as catalyst for the hydrogen production from ethanol reforming. Catal. Commun. 2008, 9, 1201–1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wang, H.; Liu, Y.; Wang, L.; Qin, Y.N. Study on the carbon deposition in steam reforming of ethanol over Co/CeO2 catalyst. Chem. Eng. J. 2008, 145, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Choong, C.K.S.; Chen, L.W.; Du, Y.H.; Schreyer, M.; Daniel Ong, S.W.; Poh, C.K.; Hong, L.; Borgna, A. The role of metal-support interaction for CO-free hydrogen from low temperature ethanol steam reforming on Rh-Fe catalysts. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2017, 19, 4199–4207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Yu, J.; Mao, D.S.; Ding, D.; Guo, X.M.; Lu, G.Z. New insights into the effects of Mn and Li on the mechanistic pathway for CO hydrogenation on Rh-Mn-Li/SiO2 catalysts. J. Mol. Catal. A Chem. 2016, 423, 151–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Qin, Z.Z.; Zhou, X.H.; Su, M.T.; Jiang, Y.X.; Ji, H.B. Hydrogenation of CO2 to dimethyl ether on La-, Ce-modified Cu-Fe/HZSM-5 catalysts. Catal. Commun. 2016, 75, 78–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lu, J.Z.; Yang, L.J.; Xu, B.L.; Wu, Q.; Zhang, D.; Yuan, S.J.; Zhai, Y.; Wang, X.; Fan, Y.; Hu, Z. Promotion effects of nitrogen doping into carbon nanotubes on supported iron Fischer-Tropsch catalysts for lower olefins. ACS Catal. 2014, 4, 613–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhou, J.F.; Duan, X.P.; Ye, L.M.; Zheng, J.W.; Li, M.M.J.; Tsang, S.E.; Yuan, Y.Z. Enhanced chemoselective hydrogenation of dimethyl oxalate to methyl glycolate over bimetallic Ag-Ni/SBA-15 catalysts. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2015, 505, 344–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Huang, Y.; Ariga, H.; Zheng, X.L.; Duan, X.P.; Takakusagi, S.; Asakura, K.; Yuan, Y.Z. Silver-modulated SiO2-supported copper catalysts for selective hydrogenation of dimethyl oxalate to ethylene glycol. J. Catal. 2013, 307, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Moulder, J.F.; Stickle, W.F.; Sobol, P.E.; Bomben, K.D. Handbook of X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy—A Reference Book of Standard Spectra for Identification and Interpretation of XPS Data; Physical Electronics Inc.: Eden Prairie, MN, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ernst, B.; Libs, S.; Chaumette, P.; Kiennemann, A. Preparation and characterization of Fischer-Tropsch active Co/SiO2 catalysts. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 1999, 186, 145–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Venezia, A.M.; La Parola, V.; Liotta, L.F.; Pantaleo, G.; Lualdi, M.; Boutonnet, M.; Jaras, S. Co/SiO2 catalysts for Fischer-Tropsch synthesis; effect of Co loading and support modification by TiO2. Catal. Today 2012, 197, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Dong, X.; Liang, X.L.; Li, H.Y.; Lin, G.D.; Zhang, P.; Zhang, H.B. Preparation and characterization of carbon nanotube-promoted Co-Cu catalyst for higher alcohol synthesis from syngas. Catal. Today 2009, 147, 158–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wang, X.; Jiang, Z.Y.; Zheng, B.J.; Xie, Z.X.; Zheng, L.S. Synthesis and shape-dependent catalytic properties of CeO2 nanocubes and truncated octahedra. CrystEngComm 2012, 14, 7579–7582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sun, Y.F.; Li, J.H.; Wang, M.N.; Hua, B.; Li, J.; Luo, J.L. A-site deficient chromite perovskite with in situ exsolution of nano-Fe: A promising bi-functional catalyst bridging the growth of CNTs and SOFCs. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 14625–14630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ogo, S.; Shimizu, T.; Nakazawa, Y.; Mukawa, K.; Mukai, D.; Sekine, Y. Steam reforming of ethanol over K promoted Co catalyst. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2015, 495, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wu, C.F.; Dupont, V.; Nahil, M.A.; Dou, B.L.; Chen, H.S.; Williams, P.T. Investigation of Ni/SiO2 catalysts prepared at different conditions for hydrogen production from ethanol steam reforming. J. Energy Inst. 2017, 90, 276–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Compagnoni, M.; Tripodi, A.; Rossetti, L. Parametric study and kinetic testing for ethanol steam reforming. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2017, 203, 899–909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, L.; Lin, G.D.; Zhang, H.B. Highly efficient Pd-ZnO catalyst doubly promoted by CNTs and Sc2O3 for methanol steam reforming. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2013, 455, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Performance of Co1.25Zn1Sck catalyst for ethanol steam reforming (ESR) to H2 as a function of Sc molar ratio. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 15/45/40 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Figure 1. Performance of Co1.25Zn1Sck catalyst for ethanol steam reforming (ESR) to H2 as a function of Sc molar ratio. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 15/45/40 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Catalysts 07 00241 g001
Figure 2. Performance of CoiZn1Sc0.3 catalyst for ESR to H2 as a function of Co molar ratio. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 15/45/40 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Figure 2. Performance of CoiZn1Sc0.3 catalyst for ESR to H2 as a function of Co molar ratio. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 15/45/40 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Catalysts 07 00241 g002
Figure 3. Thermal resistance of the catalysts Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 for ESR as a function of time on stream at different temperatures. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723–873 K temperature, 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Figure 3. Thermal resistance of the catalysts Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 for ESR as a function of time on stream at different temperatures. Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723–873 K temperature, 150,000 mL·h−1·g-cat−1 GHSV.
Catalysts 07 00241 g003
Figure 4. TEM images of as-reduced catalysts (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (b) Co2Zn1, and the spent catalysts (c) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (d) Co2Zn1.
Figure 4. TEM images of as-reduced catalysts (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (b) Co2Zn1, and the spent catalysts (c) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (d) Co2Zn1.
Catalysts 07 00241 g004
Figure 5. XRD patterns of the reduced catalysts of (a) Co2Zn1, (b) Co2Zn1Sc0.3, and the spent catalysts of (c) Co2Zn1; (d) Co2Zn1Sc0.3.
Figure 5. XRD patterns of the reduced catalysts of (a) Co2Zn1, (b) Co2Zn1Sc0.3, and the spent catalysts of (c) Co2Zn1; (d) Co2Zn1Sc0.3.
Catalysts 07 00241 g005
Figure 6. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) profiles for the spent catalysts of (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (b) Co2Zn1; (A) Co 2p; (B) Zn 2p; (C) Sc 2p; (D) O 1s.
Figure 6. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) profiles for the spent catalysts of (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and (b) Co2Zn1; (A) Co 2p; (B) Zn 2p; (C) Sc 2p; (D) O 1s.
Catalysts 07 00241 g006
Figure 7. H2-temperature-programmed reduction (H2-TPR) profiles of the oxide catalysts: (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3; (b) Co2Zn1.
Figure 7. H2-temperature-programmed reduction (H2-TPR) profiles of the oxide catalysts: (a) Co2Zn1Sc0.3; (b) Co2Zn1.
Catalysts 07 00241 g007
Table 1. Reactivity of ESR for H2 production over Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 and the other compared catalysts.
Table 1. Reactivity of ESR for H2 production over Co2Zn1Sc0.3 and Co2Zn1 and the other compared catalysts.
CatalystSBET (m2·g−1)X-EtOH (%)STY-H2 (mol·g−1·h−1)Selectivity of C-Containing Products (%)Reference
CO2COCH4
Co2Zn1Sc0.3 a134.216.61.09980.67.911.5This work
Co2Zn1 a61.710.80.68473.58.118.4
Ni1.25Zr1 b134.611.00.24770.04.725.3[20]
Ni1.25Zr1Yb0.8 b161.818.20.39683.011.45.6
RhFe/CaAl2O3 c94.31000.05260.30.039.7[28]
a Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 15/45/40 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 150,000 mL·h1·g-cat1 GHSV. The activity data was taken 100 h after the reaction started; b Reaction conditions: 0.5 MPa pressure, 723 K temperature, 12.5/37.5/50 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O/N2, and 90,000 mL·h1·g-cat1 GHSV. The activity data was taken 100 h after the reaction started; c Reaction conditions: 623 K temperature, 1/10 molar ratio of EtOH/H2O, and 34,000 mL·h1 GHSV. The activity data was taken 1.5 h after the reaction started.
Table 2. XPS binding energy and relative content of the Co species with different valence states at the surface of the tested catalysts.
Table 2. XPS binding energy and relative content of the Co species with different valence states at the surface of the tested catalysts.
CatalystB.E. (Co 2p3/2)/eVRelative Content/mol %
Co0CoOCo(OH)2Co0CoOCo(OH)2
Co2Zn1778.5780.4781.87.715.576.8
Co2Zn1Sc0.3778.4780.4781.91.248.250.6
Table 3. XPS binding energy and relative content of the O-species with different valence states at the surface of the catalysts.
Table 3. XPS binding energy and relative content of the O-species with different valence states at the surface of the catalysts.
CatalystB.E. (Co 2p3/2)/eVRelative Content/mol %
O2−OadsOHO2−OadsOH
Co2Zn1530.6531.5532.427.636.535.9
Co2Zn1Sc0.3530.5531.6532.533.921.544.6

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liang, X.; Shi, X.; Zhang, F.; Li, Y.; Zhang, H.; Yuan, Y. Improved H2 Production by Ethanol Steam Reforming over Sc2O3-Doped Co-ZnO Catalysts. Catalysts 2017, 7, 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal7080241

AMA Style

Liang X, Shi X, Zhang F, Li Y, Zhang H, Yuan Y. Improved H2 Production by Ethanol Steam Reforming over Sc2O3-Doped Co-ZnO Catalysts. Catalysts. 2017; 7(8):241. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal7080241

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liang, Xuelian, Xinping Shi, Fanfan Zhang, Yuyang Li, Hongbin Zhang, and Youzhu Yuan. 2017. "Improved H2 Production by Ethanol Steam Reforming over Sc2O3-Doped Co-ZnO Catalysts" Catalysts 7, no. 8: 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal7080241

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop