Kinetic comparison of Ni/Al2O3 and Ni/MgO-Al2O3 nano structure catalysts in CO2 reforming of methane

Document Type: Articles

Authors

1 Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Kashan, Km 6 Ravand Road, Kashan, Post Code: 87317-51167, Iran.

2 Institute of Nano Science and Nano Technology, University of Kashan, Km 6 Ravand Road, Kashan, Post Code: 87317-51167, Iran.

Abstract

The kinetic characteristics of the Ni/Al2O3 and Ni/MgO-Al2O3 catalysts were investigated in CO2 reforming of methane (CRM). The reaction orders (α and β) and the rate constant (k) were calculated using the non-linear regression analysis, in which the sum of the squared differences of calculated and experimental CO2 reforming of methane rates were minimized. The acquired results demonstrate that the methane partial pressure has a significant influence on the reaction rate compared to the partial pressure of carbon dioxide in CRM and the reaction rate of MgO- modified catalyst was higher than the unmodified sample. This may be due to the higher catalytic activity of Ni/MgO-Al2O3 compared to that of Ni/Al2O3 in CRM. The activation energy for CH4 consumption was higher than that of CO2. Meanwhile, adding CO and H2 to the feed has a negative effect on the reaction rate. The experimental CH4 consumption rates for both Ni/Al2O3 and Ni/Mg-Al2O3 were fitted to some kinetic type models in order to investigate the effect of MgO modifier on the reaction kinetics of the Ni catalyst so the model with the lowest squared error was proposed as the best model describing the reaction rate.

Keywords


[1] L. Xu, H. Song, L. Chou, Appl. Catal. B 108-109 (2011) 177-190.
[2] Z. Alipour, M. Rezaei, F. Meshkani. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 20 (2014) 2858-2863.
[3] Ş. Ӧzkara-Aydınoğlu, A.E. Aksoylu, Chem. Eng. J. 215-216 (2013) 542-549.
[4] Z. Alipour, M. Rezaei, F. Meshkani, Fuel 129 (2014) 197-203.
[5] Z. Alipour, M. Rezaei, F. Meshkani, J. Energ. Chem., 23 (2014) 633-638.
[6] F. Mirzaei, M. Rezaei, F. Meshkani, Z. Fattah, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 21 (2015) 662-667.
[7] M. Khajenoori, M. Rezaei, F. Meshkani, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 21 (2015) 717-722.
[8] N. Hadian, M. Rezaei, Z. Mosayebi, F. Meshkani, J. Nat. Gas. Chem. 21 (2012) 200-206.
[9] A.S.A. Al-Fatesh, A.H. Fakeeha, A.E. Abasaeed, Chin. J. Catal. 32 (2011) 1604-1609.
[10] X. Yu, N. Wang, W. Chu, M. Liu, Chem. Eng. J. 209 (2012) 623-632.
[11] J. Wei, Iglsia, J. Catal. 224 (2004) 370-383.
[12] J.Z. Luo, Z.L. Yu, C.F. Ng, C.T. Au, J. Catal. 194 (2000) 198-210.
[13] T. Osaki, T. Mori, J. Catal. 204 (2001) 89-97.
[14] M.C.J. Bradford, M.A. Vannice, Appl. Catal. A 142 (1996) 97-122.
[15] A. Nandini, K.K. Pant, S.C. Dhingra, Appl. Catal. A. 308 (2006) 119-127.
[16] L.M. Aparicio, J. Catal. 165 (1997) 262-274.
[17] V.A. Tsipouriari, X.E. Verykios, Catal. Today 64 (2001) 83-90.
[18] Y. Cui, H. Zhang, H. Xu, W. Li, Appl. Catal. A 318 (2007) 79-88.
[19] G. Leofanti, M. Padovan, G. Tozzola, B. Venturelli, Catal. Today 41 (1998) 207-219.
[20] K. Sutthiumporn, S. Kawi, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (2011) 14435-14446.
[21] H.S. Hyun-Seog Roh, K.W. Jun, Catal. Surv. Asia 12 (2008) 239-252.
[22] M. García-Diéguez, C. Herrera, M.Á. Larrubia, L.J. Alemany, Catal. Today 197 (2012) 50-57.
[23] P. Ferreira-Aparicio, A. Guerrero-Ruiz, I. Rodrı́guez-Ramos, Appl. Catal. A 170 (1998) 177-187.
[24] S. Wang, GQA. Lu, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38 (1999) 2615-2625.
[25] Z.L. Zhang, X.E. Verykios, Catal. Today 21 (1994) 589-595.
[26] U. Olsbye, T. Wurzel, L. Mleczko, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36 (1997) 5180-5188.
[27] J.F. Munera, S. Irusta, L.M. Cornaglia, E.A. Lombardo, D.V. Cesar, M. Schmal, J. Catal. 245 (2007) 25-34.
[28] T. Osaki, H. Fukaya, T. Horiuchi, K. Suzuki, T. Mori, J. Catal. 180 (1998) 106-109.
[29] F.M. Mark, F. Mark, W.F. Maier, Chem. Eng. Technol. 20 (1997) 361-370.
[30] J.T. Richardson, S.A. Paripatyadar, Appl. Catal. 61 (1990) 293-309.