The Influence of Active Phase Loading on the Hydrodeoxygenation (HDO) of Ethylene Glycol over Promoted MoS2/MgAl2O4 Catalysts

  • Trine M. H. Dabros
  • Hendrik Kramer
  • Martin Høj
  • Paul Sprenger
  • Jan-Dierk Grunwaldt
  • Jostein Gabrielsen
  • Anker Degn JensenEmail author
Original Paper


The hydrodeoxygenation (HDO) of ethylene glycol over MgAl2O4 supported NiMo and CoMo catalysts with around 0.8 and 3 wt% Mo loading was studied in a continuous flow reactor setup operated at 27 bar H2 and 400 °C. A co-feed of H2S of typically 550 ppm was beneficial for both deoxygenation and hydrogenation and for enhancing catalyst stability. With 2.8–3.3 wt% Mo, a total carbon based gas yield of 80–100% was obtained with an ethane yield of 36–50% at up to 118 h on stream. No ethylene was detected. A moderate selectivity towards HDO was obtained, but cracking and HDO were generally catalyzed to the same extent by the active phase. Thus, the C2/C1 ratio of gaseous products was 1.1–1.5 for all prepared catalysts independent on Mo loading (0.8–3.3 wt%), but higher yields of C1–C3 gas products were obtained with higher loading catalysts. Similar activities were obtained from Ni and Co promoted catalysts. For the low loading catalysts (0.83–0.88 wt% Mo), a slightly higher hydrogenation activity was observed over NiMo compared to CoMo, giving a relatively higher yield of ethane compared to ethylene. Addition of 30 wt% water to the ethylene glycol feed did not result in significant deactivation. Instead, the main source of deactivation was carbon deposition, which was favored at limited hydrogenation activity and thus, was more severe for the low loading catalysts.


Hydrodeoxygenation Bio-oil Catalytic hydropyrolysis Transportation fuel Molybdenum sulfide 



This work was supported by Innovation Fund Denmark (formerly The Danish Council for Strategic Research, The Programme Commission on Sustainable Energy and Environment) [Project 1305-0001 5B]. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and the German Research Foundation (DFG) financed the Raman spectrometer (INST 121384/73-1). Thomas Willum Hansen at The Center for Electron Nanoscopy (CEN) at DTU aided this work by performing transmission electron microscopy imaging.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11244_2019_1169_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1581 kb) The supplementary material contains details on NH3-TPD, additional activity test results, and TEM images.


  1. 1.
    Dabros TMH, Stummann MZ, Høj M, Jensen PA, Grunwaldt J-D, Gabrielsen J, Mortensen PM, Jensen AD (2018) Transportation fuels from biomass fast pyrolysis, catalytic hydrodeoxygenation, and catalytic fast hydropyrolysis. Prog Energy Combust Sci 68:268–309. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stummann MZ, Høj M, Schandel CB, Hansen AB, Wiwel P, Gabrielsen J, Jensen PA, Jensen AD (2018) Hydrogen assisted catalytic biomass pyrolysis. Effect of temperature and pressure. Biomass Bioenergy 115:97–107. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nguyen T-V, Clausen LR (2018) Thermodynamic analysis of polygeneration systems based on catalytic hydropyrolysis for the production of bio-oil and fuels. Energy Convers Manag 171:1617–1638. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stummann MZ, Hansen AB, Hansen LP, Davidsen B, Rasmussen SB, Wiwel P, Gabrielsen J, Jensen PA, Jensen AD, Høj M (2019) Catalytic hydropyrolysis of biomass usingmolybdenum sulfide based catalyst. Effect of promoters. Energy Fuels 33:1302–1313. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stummann MZ, Høj M, Davidsen B, Hansen AB, Hansen LP, Wiwel P, Schandel CB, Gabrielsen J, Jensen PA, Jensen AD (2019) Effect of the catalyst in fluid bed catalytic hydropyrolysis. Catal Today. Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Popp J, Lakner Z, Harangi-Rákos M, Fári M (2014) The effect of bioenergy expansion: food, energy, and environment. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 32:559–578. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Independent Statistics & Analysis—U.S. Energy information administration, international energy outlook 2016—DOE/EIA-0484, 2016. Accessed 7 July 2017
  8. 8.
    Resende FLP (2016) Recent advances on fast hydropyrolysis of biomass. Catal Today 269:148–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marker TL, Felix LG, Linck MB, Roberts MJ (2012) Integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) for the direct production of gasoline and diesel fuels or blending components from biomass, part 1: proof of principle testing. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 31:191–199. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marker TL, Felix LG, Linck MB, Roberts MJ, Ortiz-toral P, Wangerow J (2013) Integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) for the direct production of gasoline and diesel fuels or blending components from biomass, part 2: continuous testing. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 33:762–768. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baldauf W, Balfanz U, Rupp M (1994) Upgrading of flash pyrolysis oil and utilization in refineries. Biomass Bioenergy 7:237–244. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elliott DC, Hart TR, Neuenschwander GG, Rotness LJ, Zacher AH (2009) Catalytic hydroprocessing of biomass fast pyrolysis bio-oil to produce hydrocarbon products. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 28:441–449. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Furimsky E (2000) Catalytic hydrodeoxygenation. Appl Catal A Gen 199:147–190. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Furimsky E (2013) Hydroprocessing challenges in biofuels production. Catal Today 217:13–56. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang H, Male J, Wang Y (2013) Recent advances in hydrotreating of pyrolysis bio-oil and its oxygen-containing model compounds. ACS Catal 3:1047–1070. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cordero-Lanzac T, Palos R, Arandes JM, Castaño P, Rodríguez-Mirasol J, Cordero T, Bilbao J (2017) Stability of an acid activated carbon based bifunctional catalyst for the raw bio-oil hydrodeoxygenation. Appl Catal B Environ 203:389–399. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang J, Nolte MW, Shanks BH (2014) Investigation of primary reactions and secondary effects from the pyrolysis of different celluloses. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2:2820–2830. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hurt MR, Degenstein JC, Gawecki P, Borton DJ II, Vinueza NR, Yang L, Agrawal R, Delgass WN, Ribeiro FH, Kentta HI (2013) On-line mass spectrometric methods for the determination of the primary products of fast pyrolysis of carbohydrates and for their gas-phase manipulation. Anal Chem 85:10927–10934. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Routray K, Barnett KJ, Huber GW (2017) Hydrodeoxygenation of pyrolysis oils. Energy Technol 5:80–93. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ruddy DA, Schaidle JA, Ferrell JR III, Wang J, Moens L, Hensley JE (2014) Recent advances in heterogeneous catalysts for bio-oil upgrading via “ex situ catalytic fast pyrolysis”: catalyst development through the study of model compounds. Green Chem 16:454–490. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Coumans AE, Hensen EJM (2017) A real support effect on the hydrodeoxygenation of methyl oleate by sulfided NiMo catalysts. Catal Today 298:181–189. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Whiffen VML, Smith KJ (2010) Hydrodeoxygenation of 4-methylphenol over unsupported MoP, MoS2, and MoOx catalysts. Energy Fuels 24:4728–4737. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Prasomsri T, Shetty M, Murugappan K, Román-Leshkov Y (2014) Insights into the catalytic activity and surface modification of MoO3 during the hydrodeoxygenation of lignin-derived model compounds into aromatic hydrocarbons under low hydrogen pressures. Energy Environ Sci 7:2660–2669. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Oasmaa A, Elliott DC, Korhonen J (2010) Acidity of biomass fast pyrolysis bio-oils. Energy Fuels 24:6548–6554. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Houssenbay S, Payen E, Kasztelan S, Grimblot J (1991) Oxidic precursors of molybdena supported on nickel and magnesium aluminate hydrotreating catalysts. Catal Today 10:541–560. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Braun S, Appel LG, Camorim VL, Schmal M (2000) Thermal spreading of MoO3 onto silica supports. J Phys Chem B 104:6584–6590. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dabros TMH, Gaur A, Pintos DG, Sprenger P, Høj M, Hansen TW, Studt F, Gabrielsen J, Grunwaldt JD, Jensen AD (2018) Influence of H2O and H2S on the composition, activity, and stability of sulfided Mo, CoMo, and NiMo supported on MgAl2O4 for hydrodeoxygenation of ethylene glycol. Appl Catal A Gen 551:106–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Topsøe H, Clausen BS, Massoth FE (1996) Catalysis—science and technology. Hydrotreating catalysis, vol 11. Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Medici L, Prins R (1996) The influence of chelating ligands on the sulfidation of Ni and Mo in NiMo/SiO2 hydrotreating catalysts. J Catal 163:38–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chorkendorff I, Niemantsverdriet JW (2007) Conceopts of modern catalysis and kinetics, 2nd edn. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Popov A, Kondratieva E, Goupil JM, Mariey L, Bazin P, Gilson JP, Travert A, Maugé F (2010) Bio-oils hydrodeoxygenation: adsorption of phenolic molecules on oxidic catalyst supports. J Phys Chem C 114:15661–15670. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Centeno A, Laurent E, Delmon B (1995) Influence of the support of CoMo sulfide catalysts and of the addition of potassium and platinum on the catalytic performances for the hydrodeoxygenation ofcarbonyl, carboxyl, and guaiacol-type molecules. J Catal 154:288–298. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Echeandia S, Arias PL, Barrio VL, Pawelec B, Fierro JLG (2010) Synergy effect in the HDO of phenol over Ni-W catalysts supported on active carbon: effect of tungsten precursors. Appl Catal B Environ 101:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Knözinger H, Köhne R (1966) The dehydration of alcohols over alumina. I. The reaction scheme. J Catal 5:264–270. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Díez V, Aspesteguía CR, Cosimo JID (2003) Effect of the chemical composition on the catalytic performance of MgyAlOx catalysts for alcohol elimination reactions. J Catal 215:220–233. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bui VN, Laurenti D, Afanasiev P, Geantet C (2011) Hydrodeoxygenation of guaiacol with CoMo catalysts. Part I: promoting effect of cobalt on HDO selectivity and activity. Appl Catal B Environ 101:239–245. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Şenol Oİ, Ryymin E-M, Viljava T-R, Krause AOI (2007) Effect of hydrogen sulphide on the hydrodeoxygenation of aromatic and aliphatic oxygenates on sulphided catalysts. J Mol Catal A Chem 277:107–112. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bouvier C, Romero Y, Richard F, Brunet S (2011) Effect of H2S and CO on the transformation of 2-ethylphenol as a model compound of bio-crude over sulfided Mo-based catalysts: propositions of promoted active sites for deoxygenation pathways based on an experimental study. Green Chem 13:2441–2451. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    R Prins. Chapter 13.2: Hydrotreating, in: handbook of heterogeneous catalysis: Online. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2008, pp 2695–2718.
  40. 40.
    Gonçalves VOO, Brunet S, Richard F (2016) Hydrodeoxygenation of cresols over Mo/Al2O3 and CoMo/Al2O3 sulfided catalysts. Catal Lett 146:1562–1573. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schachtl E, Yoo JS, Gutiérrez OY, Studt F, Lercher JA (2017) Impact of Ni promotion on the hydrogenation pathways of phenanthrene on MoS2/γ-Al2O3. J Catal 352:171–181. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Romero Y, Richard F, Brunet S (2010) Hydrodeoxygenation of 2-ethylphenol as a model compound of bio-crude over sulfided Mo-based catalysts: promoting effect and reaction mechanism. Appl Catal B Environ 98:213–223. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bridgwater AV (2012) Review of fast pyrolysis of biomass and product upgrading. Biomass Bioenergy 38:68–94. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dayton DC, Carpenter J, Farmer J, Turk B, Gupta R (2013) Biomass hydropyrolysis in a pressurized fluidized bed reactor. Energy Fuels 27:3778–3785. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Badawi M, Paul JF, Cristol S, Payen E, Romero Y, Richard F, Brunet S, Lambert D, Portier X, Popov A, Kondratieva E, Goupil JM, El Fallah J, Gilson JP, Mariey L, Travert A, Maugé F (2011) Effect of water on the stability of Mo and CoMo hydrodeoxygenation catalysts: a combined experimental and DFT study. J Catal 282:155–164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Badawi M, Cristol S, Paul J-F, Payen E (2009) DFT study of furan adsorption over stable molybdenum sulfide catalyst under HDO conditions. C R Chim 12:754–761. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gaur A, Dabros TMH, Høj M, Boubnov A, Prüssmann T, Jelic J, Studt F, Jensen AD, Grunwaldt J-D (2019) Probing the active sites of MoS2 based hydrotreating catalysts using modulation excitation spectroscopy. ACS Catal 9:2568–2579. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lauritsen JV, Besenbacher F (2015) Atom-resolved scanning tunneling microscopy investigations of molecular adsorption on MoS2 and CoMoS hydrodesulfurization catalysts. J Catal 328:49–58. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Topsøe N-Y, Topsøe H (1993) FTIR studies of Mo/Al2O3-based catalysts. II. Evidence for the presence of SH groups and their role in acidity and activity. J Catal 139:641–651. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    McKetta JJ (1992) Petroleum processing handbook. CRC Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Venderbosch RH, Ardiyanti AR, Wildschut J, Oasmaa A, Heeres HJ (2010) Stabilization of biomass-derived pyrolysis oils. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 85:674–686. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kwon KC, Mayfield H, Marolla T, Nichols B, Mashburn M (2011) Catalytic deoxygenation of liquid biomass for hydrocarbon fuels. Renew Energy 36:907–915. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Spevack PA, McIntyre NS (1993) A Raman and XPS investigation of supported molybdenum oxide thin films. 2. Reactions with hydrogen sulfide. J Phys Chem 97:11031–11036. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Schrader GL, Cheng CP (1983) In situ laser raman spectroscopy of the sulfiding of Mo/γ-Al2O3 catalysts. J Catal 80:369–385. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chang CH, Chan SS (1981) Infrared and raman studies of amorphous MoS3 and poorly crystalline MoS2. J Catal 72:139–148. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Laurent E, Delmon B (1994) Influence of water in the deactivation of a sulfided NiMo/γ-Al2O3 catalyst during hydrodeoxygenation. J Catal 146:281–291. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sattler JJHB, Beale AM, Weckhuysen BM (2013) Operando Raman spectroscopy study on the deactivation of Pt/Al2O3 and Pt–Sn/Al2O3 propane dehydrogenation catalysts. Phys Chem Chem Phys 15:12095–12103. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sadezky A, Muckenhuber H, Grothe H, Niessner R, Pöschl U (2005) Raman microspectroscopy of soot and related carbonaceous materials: spectral analysis and structural information. Carbon 43:1731–1742. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    FIZ Karlsruhe, ICSD FIZ Karlsruhe. ICSD web database, (n.d.). Accessed 3 Nov 2017

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Trine M. H. Dabros
    • 1
    • 5
  • Hendrik Kramer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Martin Høj
    • 1
  • Paul Sprenger
    • 3
  • Jan-Dierk Grunwaldt
    • 3
  • Jostein Gabrielsen
    • 4
  • Anker Degn Jensen
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Chemical and Biochemical EngineeringTechnical University of Denmark (DTU)Kgs. LyngbyDenmark
  2. 2.IWT Foundation Institute of Material ScienceUniversity of BremenBremenGermany
  3. 3.Institute for Chemical Technology and Polymer ChemistryKarlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)KarlsruheGermany
  4. 4.Haldor Topsøe A/SKgs. LyngbyDenmark
  5. 5.Haldor Topsøe A/SKgs. LyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations