Advertisement

Kinetic Study of Dry Reforming of Methane Over Ni–Ce/Al2O3 Catalyst with Deactivation

  • Daniel Zambrano
  • Jaime SolerEmail author
  • Javier Herguido
  • Miguel Menéndez
Original Paper
  • 60 Downloads

Abstract

A kinetic study for dry reforming of methane over Ni–Ce/Al2O3 catalyst was performed, taking into account both the main reactions and the catalyst deactivation. The catalyst was prepared by a sequential wet impregnation process, with loadings of 5 wt.% Ni and 10 wt.% Ce. Experimental tests were carried out in a fixed bed reactor between 475 and 550 °C and several spatial times, using nitrogen as diluent. Several kinetic equations were compared. The best fit of experimental data was achieved using a Langmuir–Hinshelwood mechanism which takes into account the presence of two active sites. Pre-exponential factor and activation energy were calculated. the kinetics of deactivation was also determined. The relationship between catalyst activity and coke concentration was also studied. Several deactivation equations were considered in order to choose the best fit with experimental data.

Keywords

Catalyst deactivation Kinetic modelling Methane dry reforming Hydrogen production 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Ministry of Science and Technology (Spain) for financial support through Project ENE 2013-44350R.

Supplementary material

11244_2019_1157_MOESM1_ESM.doc (2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 2019 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Aramouni NAK, Touma JG, Tarboush BA, Zeaiter J, Ahmad MN (2018) Catalyst design for dry reforming of methane: analysis review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 82:2570–2585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khoshtinat Nikoo M, Amin NAS (2011) Thermodynamic analysis of carbon dioxide reforming of methane in view of solid carbon formation. Fuel Process Technol 92:678–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alenazey FS (2014) Utilizing carbon dioxide as a regenerative agent in methane dry reforming to improve hydrogen production and catalyst activity and longevity. ‎Int J Hydrog Energy 39:18632–18641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Drif A, Bion N, Brahmi R, Ojala S, Pirault-Roy L, Turpeinen E, Seelam PK, Keiski RL, Epron F (2015) Study of the dry reforming of methane and ethanol using Rh catalysts supported on doped alumina. Appl Catal A 504:576–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steinhauer B, Kasireddy MR, Radnik J, Martin A (2009) Development of Ni-Pd bimetallic catalysts for the utilization of carbon dioxide and methane by dry reforming. Appl Catal A 366:333–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Usman M, Wan Daud WMA, Abbas HF (2015) Dry reforming of methane: Influence of process parameters: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 45:710–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sengupta S, Ray K, Deo G (2014) Effects of modifying Ni/Al2O3 catalyst with cobalt on the reforming of CH4 with CO2 and cracking of CH4 reactions. Int J Hydrog Energy 39:11462–11472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laosiripojana N, Sutthisripok W, Assabumrungrat S (2005) Synthesis gas production from dry reforming of methane over CeO2 doped Ni/Al2O3: influence of the doping ceria on the resistance toward carbon formation. Chem Eng J 112:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ay H, Üner D (2015) Dry reforming of methane over CeO2 supported Ni, Co and Ni-Co catalysts. Appl Catal B 179:128–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herguido J, Menéndez M (2017) Advances and trends in two-zone fluidized-bed reactors. Curr Opin Chem Eng 17:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    El Solh T, Jarosch K, de Lasa H (2003) Catalytic dry reforming of methane in a CREC riser simulator kinetic modeling and model discrimination. Ind Eng Chem Res 42:2507–2515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gokon N, Yamawaki Y, Nakazawa D, Kodama T (2011) Kinetics of methane reforming over Ru/γ-Al2O3-catalyzed metallic foam at 650–900 °C for solar receiver-absorbers. Int J Hydrog Energy 36:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kathiraser Y, Oemar U, Saw ET, Li Z, Kawi S (2015) Kinetic and mechanistic aspects for CO2 reforming of methane over Ni based catalysts. Chem Eng J 278:62–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mark MF, Maier WF, Mark F (1997) Reaction kinetics of the CO2 reforming of methane. Chem Eng Technol 20(6):361–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Benguerba Y, Virginie M, Dumas C, Ernst B (2017) Methane dry reforming over Ni-Co/Al2O3: kinetic modelling in a catalytic fixed-bed reactor. Int J Chem React Eng 15(6)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Özkara-Aydınoğlu Ş, Erhan Aksoylu A (2013) A comparative study on the kinetics of carbon dioxide reforming of methane over Pt–Ni/Al2O3 catalyst: effect of Pt/Ni ratio. Chem Eng J 215–216:542–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang S, Lu GQ (1999) A comprehensive study on carbon dioxide reforming of methane over Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalysts. Ind Eng Chem Res 38(7):2615–2625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pakhare D, Spivey J (2014) A review of dry (CO2) reforming of methane over noble metal catalysts. Chem Soc Rev 43:7813–7837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ginsburg JM, Piña J, El Solh T, de Lasa H (2005) Coke formation over a nickel catalyst under methane dry reforming conditions: thermodynamic and kinetic models. Ind Eng Chem Res 44(14):4846–4854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ayodele BV, Khan MR, Lam SS, Cheng CK (2016) Production of CO-rich hydrogen from methane dry reforming over lanthania-supported cobalt catalyst: kinetic and mechanistic studies. Int J Hydrog Energy 41(8):4603–4615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang S, Lu GQ, Millar GJ (1996) Carbon dioxide reforming of methane to produce synthesis gas over metal-supported catalysts: state of the art. Energy Fuel 10:896–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang S, Lu GQ (2000) Reaction kinetics and deactivation of Ni-based catalysts in CO2 reforming of methane. React Eng Pollut Prev 8:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osaki T, Horiuchi T, Suzuki K, Mori T (1997) Catalyst performance of MoS2 and WS2 for the CO2-reforming of CH4 suppression of carbon deposition. Appl Catal A 155(2):229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Foo SY, Cheng K, Nguyen TH, Adesina AA (2010) Kinetic study of methane CO2 reforming on Co–Ni/Al2O3 and Ce–Co–Ni/Al2O3 catalysts. Catal Today 164:221–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barroso Quiroga MM, Castro Luna AE (2007) Kinetic analysis of rate data for dry reforming of methane. Ind Eng Chem Res 46:5265–5270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fan MS, Abdullah AZ, Bhatia S (2009) Catalytic technology for carbon dioxide reforming of methane to synthesis gas. Chem Cat Chem 1:192–208Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Benguerba Y, Dehimi L, Virginie M, Dumas C, Ernst B (2015) Modelling of methane dry reforming over Ni/Al2O3 catalyst in a fixed-bed catalytic reactor. React Kinet Mech Catal 114:109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Richardson JT, Paripatyadar SA (1990) Carbon dioxide reforming of methane with supported rhodium. Appl Catal 61:293–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Snoeck JW, Froment GF, Fowles M (1997) Kinetic study of the carbon filament formation by methane cracking on a nickel catalyst. J Catal 169:250–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Snoeck JW, Froment GF, Fowles M (2002) Steam/CO2 reforming of methane. Carbon filament formation by the Boudouard reaction and gasification by CO2, by H2, and by steam: kinetic study. Ind Eng Chem Res 41:4252–4265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chein RY, Hsu WH, Yu CT (2017) Parametric study of catalytic dry reforming of methane for syngas production at elevated pressures. Int J Hydrog Energy 42:14485–14500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Monzón A, Romeo E, Borgna A (2003) Relationship between the kinetic parameters of different catalyst deactivation models. Chem Eng J 94(1):19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Corella J, Adanez J, Monzón A (1988) Some intrinsic kinetic equations and deactivation mechanisms leading to deactivation curves with a residual activity. Ind Eng Chem Res 27:375–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Świrk K, Gálvez ME, Motak M, Grzybek T, Da Costa P (2018) Syngas production from dry methane reforming over yttrium-promoted nickel-KIT-6 catalysts. Int J Hydrog Energy 44(1):274–286Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gimeno MP, Soler J, Herguido J, Menéndez M (2010) Counteracting catalyst deactivation in methane aromatization with a two zone fluidized bed reactor. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:996–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yus M, Soler J, Herguido J, Menéndez M (2018) Glycerol steam reforming with low steam/glycerol ratio in a two-zone fluidized bed reactor. Catal Today 299:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ugarte P, Durán P, Lasobras J, Soler J, Menéndez M, Herguido J (2017) Dry reforming of biogas in fluidized bed: process intensification. Int J Hydrog Energy 42:13589–13597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Corella J, Asúa JM (1982) Kinetic equations of mechanistic type with nonseparable variables for catalyst deactivation by coke. Models and data analysis methods. Ind Eng Chem Process Des Dev 21:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chen D, Lødeng R, Anundskås A, Olsvik O, Holmen A (2001) Deactivation during carbon dioxide reforming of methane over Ni catalyst: microkinetic analysis. Chem Eng Sci 56:1371–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Aragon Institute for Engineering Research (I3A)Universidad de ZaragozaZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations