Topics in Catalysis

, Volume 59, Issue 2–4, pp 303–313 | Cite as

Ru–Ni Catalyst in the Combined Dry-Steam Reforming of Methane: The Importance in the Metal Order Addition

  • Andrea Álvarez M
  • Miguel Ángel Centeno
  • José Antonio Odriozola
Original Paper


Biogas is one of the main biomass-energy resources. Its use for syngas production with a H2/CO ratio close to two would have huge environmental, social and economic impact in the actual energetic scenario. However, the use of dry reforming, where the two main components are transformed into syngas, does not allow the desired H2/CO ratio. For this reason, the addition of water is proposed. The process was performed with two Ru–Ni catalysts where the metal order in the impregnation process was varied. The catalysts were prepared either by simultaneous or consecutive impregnation of the active phases and its catalytic performance in the combined dry-steam reforming of methane was tested. The catalysts were characterized by XRF, XRD, SBET, TPR-H2 and Raman spectroscopy. The existence of a strong Ni–Ru interaction is evidenced by Raman spectroscopy and TPR-H2 in the sample synthesized by the simultaneous impregnation. Concerning the catalytic activity, this sample presents the highest CH4 and CO2 conversion values in the entire composition rate and the lowest amount of carbon deposits after reaction. After pulse, and reactivity tests it was concluded that the higher Ni–Ru interaction displayed by the catalyst synthesized by the simultaneous impregnation, enhances the carbon gasification.


Combined steam-dry reforming of methane Syngas Ru–Ni catalyst 



Financial support for this work has been obtained from the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) (ENE2012-374301-C03-01 and ENE2013-47880-C3-2-R) co-financed by FEDER funds from the European Union and from Junta de Andalucía (TEP-8196).


  1. 1.
    Boudghene Stambouli A, Traversa E (2002) Fuel cells, an alternative to standard sources of energy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 6:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dry ME (2001) High quality diesel via the Fischer-Tropsch process. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 77:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stambouli AB (2002) Fuel cells: the expectations for an environmental-friendly and sustainable source of energy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15:4507–4520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stambouli AB, Traversa E (2002) Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs): a review of an environmentally clean and efficient source of energy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 6:433–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sousa-Aguiar EF, Appel LG, Mota C (2005) Natural gas chemical transformations: the path to refining in the future. Catal Today 101:3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Froment GF (2000) Production of synthesis gas by steam and CO2 reforming of natural gas. J Mol Catal A Chem 163:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Angeli SD, Monteleone G, Giaconia A, Lemonidou AA (2014) State-of-the-art catalysts for CH4 steam reforming at low temperature. Int J Hydrogen Energy 39:1979–1997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xu J, Froment GF (1989) Methane steam reforming, methanation and water-gas shift: I. Intrinsic kinetics. AIChE J 35:88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oliveira ELG, Grande CA, Rodrigues AE (2009) Steam methane reforming in a Ni/Al2O3 catalyst: kinetics and diffusional limitations in extrudates. Can J Chem Eng 87:945–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rostrup-Nielsen JR (1994) Catalysis and large-scale conversion of natural gas. Catal Today 21:257–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guczi L, Erdohelyi A (2012) Catalysis for alternative energy Generation. Springer, New York, pp 1–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bradford MCJ, Vannice MA (1999) Review. CO2 reforming of CH4. Catal Rev 41:1–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bradford MCJ, Vannice MA (1996) Review. Catalytic reforming of CH4 with CO2. II. Reaction Kinetics. Appl Catal A 142:97–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bradford MCJ, Vannice MA (1999) CO2 reforming of CH4 over supported Ru catalysts. J Catal 183:69–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bradford MCJ, Vannice MA (1999) The role of metal-support interactions in CO2 reforming of CH4. Catal Today 50:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang HY, Ruckenstein E (2000) Carbon dioxide reforming of methane to synthesis gas over supported rhodium catalyst: the effect of support. Appl Catal A 204:143–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ryi S-K, Lee S-W, Park J-W et al. (2013) Combined steam and CO2 reforming of methane using catalytic nickel membrane for gas to liquid (GTL) process. Catal Today 236:49–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rostrup-Nielsen J (1984) Catalytic steam reforming. In: Anderson J, Boudart M (eds) Catalysis. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rostrup-Nielsen JR (2000) New aspects of syngas production. Catal Today 63:159–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rostrup-Nielsen JR, Sehested J (2002) Review. Hydrogen and synthesis gas by steam and CO2 reforming. Adv Synth Catal 47:65–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koo KY, Roh H-S, Jung UH et al (2009) Combined H2O and CO2 reforming of CH4 over nano-sized Ni/MgO-Al2O3 catalysts for synthesis gas production for gas to liquid (GTL): effect of Mg/Al mixed ratio on coke formation. Catal Today 146:166–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koo KY, Roh H-S, Jung UH, Yoon WL (2012) Combined H2O and CO2 reforming of CH4 over Ce-promoted Ni/Al2O3 catalyst for gas to liquid (GTL) process: enhancement of Ni–CeO2 interaction. Catal Today 185:126–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Choudhary VR, Rajput AM (1996) Simultaneous Carbon Dioxide and Steam Reforming of Methane to Syngas over NiO–CaO Catalyst. Ind Eng Chem Res 35:3934–3939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gangadharan P, Kanchi KC, Lou HH (2012) Evaluation of the economic and environmental impact of combining dry reforming with steam reforming of methane. Chem Eng Res Des 90(1956–1968):8Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Islam MR (2015) Chapter 3—important features of unconventional gas. In: Islam MR (ed) Unconventional gas reservoirs. Gulf Professional Publishing, Boston, pp 71–127Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Holditch SA (2013) Unconventional oil and gas resource development—let’s do it right. J Unconv Oil Gas Resour 1–2:2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weijermars R, Drijkoningen G, Heimovaara TJ et al (2011) Unconventional gas research initiative for clean energy transition in Europe. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 3:402–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McGlade C, Speirs J, Sorrell S (2013) Unconventional gas—a review of regional and global resource estimates. Energy 55:571–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bartholomew CH (2001) Mechanisms of catalyst deactivation. Appl Catal A 212:17–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang S, Lu GQM (2000) Effects of promoters on catalytic activity and carbon deposition of Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalysts in CO2 reforming of CH4. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 75:589–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Horiuchi T, Sakuma K, Fukui T et al (1996) Suppression of carbon deposition in the CO2-reforming of CH4 by adding basic metal oxides to a Ni/Al2O3 catalyst. Appl Catal A 144:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Penkova A, Bobadilla L, Ivanova S et al (2011) Hydrogen production by methanol steam reforming on NiSn/MgO-Al2O3 catalysts: the role of MgO addition. Appl Catal A 392:184–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bobadilla LF, Penkova A, Romero-Sarria F et al (2014) Influence of the acid-base properties over NiSn/MgO-Al2O3 catalysts in the hydrogen production from glycerol steam reforming. Int J Hydrogen Energy 39:5704–5712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bobadilla LF, Palma S, Ivanova S et al (2013) Steam reforming of methanol over supported Ni and Ni–Sn nanoparticles. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:6646–6656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Trimm DL (1999) Catalysts for the control of coking during steam reforming. Catal Today 49:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Trimm DL (1997) Coke formation and minimisation during steam reforming reactions. Catal Today 37:233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rostrup-Nielsen J, Trimm DL (1977) Mechanisms of carbon formation on nickel-containing catalysts. J Catal 48:155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    de Miguel SR, Vilella IMJ, Maina SP et al (2012) Influence of Pt addition to Ni catalysts on the catalytic performance for long term dry reforming of methane. Appl Catal A 435–436:10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jeong JH, Lee JW, Seo DJ et al (2006) Ru-doped Ni catalysts effective for the steam reforming of methane without the pre-reduction treatment with H2. Appl Catal A 302:151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Crisafulli C, Scirè S, Minicò S, Solarino L (2002) Ni-Ru bimetallic catalyst for the CO2 reforming of methane. Appl Catal A 225:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Crisafulli C, Maggiore R, Minicò S, Galvagno S (1999) CO2 reforming of methane over Ni-Ru catalyst and Ni-Pd bimetallic catalyst. Catal Lett 59:21–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mukainakano Y, Yoshida K, Kado S et al (2008) Catalytic performance and characterization of Pt–Ni bimetallic catalysts for oxidative steam reforming of methane. Chem Eng Sci 63:4891–4901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mukainakano Y, Yoshida K, Okumura K et al (2008) Catalytic performance and QXAFS analysis of Ni catalysts modified with Pd for oxidative steam reforming of methane. Catal Today 132:101–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mukainakano Y, Li B, Kado S et al (2007) Surface modification of Ni catalysts with trace Pd and Rh for oxidative steam reforming of methane. Appl Catal A 318:252–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yoshida K, Okumura K, Miyao T et al (2008) Oxidative steam reforming of methane over Ni/α-Al2O3 modified with trace Pd. Appl Catal A 351:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Leofanti G, Padovan M, Tozzola G, Venturelli B (1998) Surface area and pore texture of catalyst. Catal Today 41:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Condon JB (2006) Surface area and porosity determinations by physisorption. Measurements and theory. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Danilenko VM, Velikanova TY, Mazhuga TG et al (1999) Thermodynamic simulation of the Ni—Ru binary-system phase diagram. Powder Metall Met Ceram 38:254–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Shiraga M, Li D, Atake I et al (2007) Partial oxidation of propane to synthesis gas over noble metals-promoted Ni/Mg(Al)O catalysts—high activity of Ru–Ni/Mg(Al)O catalyst. Appl Catal A 318:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rynkowski JM, Paryjczak T, Lenik M (1995) Characterization of alumina supported Ni Ru systems. Appl Catal A 126:257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Óhoro MP, Frisillo AL, White WB (1973) Lattice vibrations of MgAl2O4 spinel. J Phys Chem Solids 34:23–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Minh NV, Yang I-S (2004) A Raman study of cation-disorder transition temperature of natural MgAl2O4 spinel. In: The 2nd International Conference on Advanced Vibrational Spectroscopy (ICAVS-2), vol. 35, pp 93–96Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yadav SK, Jeevanandam P (2014) Synthesis of NiO–Al2O3 nanocomposites by sol–gel process and their use as catalyst for the oxidation of styrene. J Alloy Compd 610:567–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wang W, Liu Y, Xu C et al (2002) Synthesis of NiO nanorods by a novel simple precursor thermal decomposition approach. Chem Phys Lett 362:119–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zhu G, Xi C, Xu H et al (2012) Hierarchical NiO hollow microspheres assembled from nanosheet-stacked nanoparticles and their application in a gas sensor. RSC Adv 2:4236–4241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kim MH, Baik JM, Lee SJ et al (2010) Growth direction determination of a single RuO2 nanowire by polarized Raman spectroscopy. Appl Phys Lett 96:213108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Meng L, Teixeira V, dos Santos MP (2003) Raman spectroscopy analysis of magnetron sputtered RuO2 thin films. Thin Solid Films 442:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Korotcov A, Hsu HP, Huang YS et al (2007) Deposition and characterization of 1D RuO2 nanocrystals by reactive sputtering. J Alloy Compd 442:310–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Huang YS, Pollak FH (1982) Raman Spectroscopy of RuO2. Solid State Commun 43:921–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Koopman PGJ, Kieboom APG, van Bekkum H (1981) Characterization of ruthenium catalyst as studied by temperature programmed reduction. J Catal 69:172–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Balint I, Miyazaki A, Aika K-I (2003) Chemical and morphological evolution of supported Ru nanoparticles during oxidative conversion of methane. React Kinet Catal Lett 80:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Qiu Y, Chen J, Zhang J (2007) Effects of MgO promoter on properties of Ni/Al2O3 catalysts for partial oxidation of methane to syngas. Front Chem Sci Eng 1:167–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Dieuzeide ML, Iannibelli V, Jobbagy M, Amadeo N (2012) Steam reforming of glycerol over Ni/Mg/γ-Al2O3 catalysts. Effect of calcination temperatures. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:14926–14930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Salehi E, Azad FS, Harding T, Abedi J (2010) Production of hydrogen by steam reforming of bio-oil over Ni/Al2O3 catalysts: effect of addition of promoter and preparation procedure. Fuel Process Technol 92:2203–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    de Sousa FF, de Sousa HSA, Oliveira AC et al (2011) Nanostructured Ni-containing spinel oxides for the dry reforming of methane: Effect of the presence of cobalt and nickel on the deactivation behaviour of catalysts. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:3201–3212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Enger B, Lødeng R, Holmen A (2010) Effects of noble metal promoters on in situ reduced low loading ni catalysts for methane activation. Catal Lett 134:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Li C, Brown TC (2001) Carbon oxidation kinetics from evolved carbon oxide analysis during temperature programmed oxidation. Carbon 39:725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Shincho E, Egawa C, Naito S, Tamaru K (1985) The behaviour of carbon species produced by CO disproportionation on Ru(1, 1, 10) and Ru(001) surfaces. Surf Sci 155:153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Shincho E, Egawa C, Naito S, Tamaru K (1985) The behaviour of CO adsorbed on Ru(1,1,10) and Ru(001); the dissociation of CO at the step sites of the Ru(1,1,10) surface. Surf Sci 149:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Freund HJ, Messmer RP (1986) On the bonding and reactivity of CO2 on metal surfaces. Surf Sci 172:1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Wei J, Iglesia E (2004) Isotopic and kinetic assessment of the mechanism of reactions of CH4 with CO2 or H2O to form synthesis gas and carbon on nickel catalysts. J Catal 224:370–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Álvarez M
    • 1
  • Miguel Ángel Centeno
    • 1
  • José Antonio Odriozola
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Ciencia de Materiales de SevillaCentro Mixto Universidad de Sevilla-CSICSevilleSpain

Personalised recommendations