catalytic oxidation of no over mnox–ceo2 and mnox–tio2 catalysts

Clicks: 345
ID: 214975
2016
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #149 of 1,183 articles by views in Journal of ethnopharmacology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,183 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
A series of MnOx–CeO2 and MnOx–TiO2 catalysts were prepared by a homogeneous precipitation method and their catalytic activities for the NO oxidation in the absence or presence of SO2 were evaluated. Results show that the optimal molar ratio of Mn/Ce and Mn/Ti are 0.7 and 0.5, respectively. The MnOx–CeO2 catalyst exhibits higher catalytic activity and better resistance to SO2 poisoning than the MnOx–TiO2 catalyst. On the basis of Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET), X-ray diffraction (XRD), and scanning transmission electron microscope with mapping (STEM-mapping) analyses, it is seen that the MnOx–CeO2 catalyst possesses higher BET surface area and better dispersion of MnOx over the catalyst than MnOx–TiO2 catalyst. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurements reveal that MnOx–CeO2 catalyst provides the abundance of Mn3+ and more surface adsorbed oxygen, and SO2 might be preferentially adsorbed to the surface of CeO2 to form sulfate species, which provides a protection of MnOx active sites from being poisoned. In contrast, MnOx active sites over the MnOx–TiO2 catalyst are easily and quickly sulfated, leading to rapid deactivation of the catalyst for NO oxidation. Furthermore, temperature programmed desorption with NO and O2 (NO + O2-TPD) and in situ diffuse reflectance infrared transform spectroscopy (in situ DRIFTS) characterizations results show that the MnOx–CeO2 catalyst displays much stronger ability to adsorb NOx than the MnOx–TiO2 catalyst, especially after SO2 poisoning.
Reference Key
zeng2016moleculescatalytic Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Xiaolan Zeng;Xiaoyue Huo;Tianle Zhu;Xiaowei Hong;Ye Sun
Journal Journal of ethnopharmacology
Year 2016
DOI
10.3390/molecules21111491
URL
http://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/21/11/1491
Keywords
no catalytic oxidation so2organic chemistry

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.