Selective catalytic oxidation of carbon monoxide with carbon dioxide, water vapor and excess hydrogen on CuO–CeO2 mixed oxide catalysts

Bae, Chul Min; Ko, Jung Bong; Kim, Dong Hyun

doi:10.1016/j.catcom.2005.04.017

Cited by 39 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The selectivity in the PROX reaction is only about 45-55% for the Pt-based catalysts. The copper catalysts of CuO-CeO 2 have been reported to be active and comparable to the Pt-based catalysts in the oxidation of CO [1,13,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of CO in excess hydrogen over CuO/Ce1−xMnxO2 catalysts

Peng

Lia

Liaw

et al. 2011

Chemical Engineering Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of CO in excess hydrogen over CuO/Ce1−xMnxO2 catalysts

Peng

Lia

Liaw

et al. 2011

Chemical Engineering Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Additionally, the catalytic activity of CuO-CeO 2 is usually negatively affected by water vapor, which limits their practical application. For example, Bae et al [11] reported that with 14% H 2 O in the feed, the reaction temperature increased by around 60 and 40 • C respectively for the 10 and 20 at % Cu-CeO 2 catalysts prepared by co-precipitation method in the CO catalytic oxidation. Thus, it is highly desired to develop highly efficient and stabilized CO catalytic materials, especially with a strong water resistive property.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalytic Behaviour of Flame-Made CuO-CeO2 Nanocatalysts in Efficient CO Oxidation

Zhao

et al. 2019

Catalysts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CuO-CeO2 nanocatalysts with varying CuO contents (1, 5, 9, 14 and 17 wt %) were prepared by one-step flame spray pyrolysis (FSP) and applied to CO oxidation. The inﬂuences of CuO content on the as-prepared catalysts were systematically characterized by X-ray diﬀraction (XRD), N2 adsorption-desorption at −196 °C, field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM), Raman spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and hydrogen-temperature programmed reduction (H2-TPR). A superior CO oxidation activity was observed for the 14 wt % CuO-CeO2 catalyst, with 90% CO conversion at 98 °C at space velocity (60,000 mL × g−1 × h−1), which was attributed to abundant surface defects (lattice distortion, Ce3+, and oxygen vacancies) and high reducibility supported by strong synergistic interaction. In addition, the catalyst also displayed excellent stability and resistance to water vapor. Significantly, in situ diﬀuse reﬂectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy (in situ DRIFTS) showed that in the CO catalytic oxidation process, the strong synergistic interaction led readily to dehydroxylation and CO adsorption on Cu+ at low temperature. Furthermore, in the feed of water vapor, although there was an adverse effect on the access of CO adsorption, there was also a positive effect on the formation of fewer carbon intermediates. All these results showed the potential of highly active and water vapor-resistive CuO-CeO2 catalysts prepared by FSP.

show abstract

“…The articles reviewed here show quite different results for stability. In most of the cases stability tests were not performed [7,8,17,[20][21][22]25,27,29,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39]. In the remaining works, stability tests were conducted for time durations ranging from 12 to 200 h, at temperatures in the 80.175 • C range.…”

Section: Catalyst Stabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arrhenius plots for k L constants evaluated for selected copper-ceria catalysts: A [6], B [24], C (this work), D [7], E [10], F [29] and G [19] (descriptions of these catalysts can be found in Table 1). …”

Section: Ranking Of Catalytic Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to determine this, values for parameters such as particle size, reactor dimensions or weight of inert particles (when dilution is performed) are also needed. Applying standard assumptions for the bed porosity and apparent density of the catalysts and inert materials, only in the case of seven works [12,19,24,27,[29][30][31] was it possible to evaluate the existence or absence of diffusion restrictions by standard correlations [32]. External diffusion resistances were absent in all the analysed works (Carberry number below 0.05 [32]), whereas axial dispersion, evaluated by means of the Peclet number [32], was found to be a potentially occurring factor in four [12,19,24,27] out of the seven analysed works.…”

Section: Ranking Of Catalytic Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation