SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Chemistry / 2014 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 1

Selective catalytic reduction of sulfur dioxide by carbon monoxide over iron oxide supported on activated carbon

Guangjian WANG
Liancheng BING
Zhijian YANG
Jiankang ZHANG
Pages
70–78
Publication Date
2014-05-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The active phase of catalyst was detected as FeS2, and the formation of FeS2 was greatly dependent on the sulfidation temperature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The selective reduction of sulfur dioxide with carbon monoxide to elemental sulfur was studied over AC-supported transition-metal oxide catalysts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the study, Fe2O3/AC was the most active catalyst among the 4 AC-supported catalysts tested.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The active phase of catalyst was detected as FeS2, and the formation of FeS2 was greatly dependent on the sulfidation temperature.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sulfur dioxide · carbon monoxide · activated carbon

Abstract

The selective reduction of sulfur dioxide with carbon monoxide to elemental sulfur was studied over AC-supported transition-metal oxide catalysts. According to the study, Fe2O3/AC was the most active catalyst among the 4 AC-supported catalysts tested. By using Fe2O3/AC, the best catalyst, when the feed conditions were properly optimized (CO/SO2 molar ratio = 2:1; sulfidation temperature, 400 °C; Fe content, 20 wt%; GHSV = 7000 mL g-1 h-1), 95.43% sulfur dioxide conversion and 86.59% sulfur yield were obtained at the temperature of 350 °C. Catalyst samples were characterized by X-ray powder diffraction in order to relate the phase composition to the activation behavior and catalytic performance. The active phase of catalyst was detected as FeS2, and the formation of FeS2 was greatly dependent on the sulfidation temperature.

Özet

The selective reduction of sulfur dioxide with carbon monoxide to elemental sulfur was studied over AC-supported transition-metal oxide catalysts. According to the study, Fe2O3/AC was the most active catalyst among the 4 AC-supported catalysts tested. By using Fe2O3/AC, the best catalyst, when the feed conditions were properly optimized (CO/SO2 molar ratio = 2:1; sulfidation temperature, 400 °C; Fe content, 20 wt%; GHSV = 7000 mL g-1 h-1), 95.43% sulfur dioxide conversion and 86.59% sulfur yield were obtained at the temperature of 350 °C. Catalyst samples were characterized by X-ray powder diffraction in order to relate the phase composition to the activation behavior and catalytic performance. The active phase of catalyst was detected as FeS2, and the formation of FeS2 was greatly dependent on the sulfidation temperature.

🔖

Cite This Article

WANG, G., BING, L., YANG, Z., ZHANG, J. (2014). Selective catalytic reduction of sulfur dioxide by carbon monoxide over iron oxide supported on activated carbon. Turkish Journal of Chemistry, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 1, 70–78. https://ajindex.com/articles/184712

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (28)

  1. Han, G. B.; Park, N. K.; Yoon, S. H.; Lee, T. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2008, 47, 1427–1434. Kadio˘ glu, Y. Y.; Karaca, S. Turk. J. Chem. 1998, 22, 129–136.
  2. Lee, H. M.; Han, J. D. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 2623–2629.
  3. Wang, X.; Wang, A.; Li, N.; Wang, X.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, T. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006, 45, 4582–4588.
  4. Tseng, H.; Wey M.; Fu, C. Carbon 2003, 41, 139–149.
  5. Li, K.; Ling, L.; Lu, C.; Qiao, W.; Liu, Z.; Liu, L.; Mochida, I. Carbon 2001, 39, 1803–1808. Kopa¸ c, T.; Kocaba¸s, S. Chem. Eng. Commun. 2003, 190, 1041–1054.
  6. Yu, J.; Yu, Q.; Jin, Y.; Chang, S. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1997, 36, 2128–2133.
  7. Paik, S. C.; Chung, J. S. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 1995, 5, 233–243.
  8. Liu, W.; Wadia, C.; Flytzani-Stephanopoulos, M. Catal. Today 1996, 28, 391–403.
  9. Wang, C.; Lin, S.; Hwang, W.; Weng, H. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 666–671.
  10. Chen, C.; Wang, C.; Weng, H. Chemosphere 2004, 56, 425–431.
  11. Paik, S. C.; Chung, J. S. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 1996, 8, 267–279.
  12. Zhuang, S. X.; Magara, H.; Yamazaki, M.; Takahashi, Y.; Yamad, M. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 2000, 24, 89–96.
  13. Zhu, T.; Dreher1, A.; Flytzani-Stephanopoulos, M. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 1999, 21, 103–120.
  14. Klinzing, G. E.; Walker, R. J. Fuel 1984, 63, 1450–1454.
  15. Bejarano, C. A.; Jia, C. Q. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 800–804.
  16. Khalafalla, S. E.; Haas, L. A. J. Catal., 1972, 24, 121–129.
  17. Han, G. B.; Park, N.; Yoon, S. H.; Lee, T. J.; Yoon, K. J. Appl. Catal., A. Gen. 2008, 337, 29–38.
  18. Kim, H.; Park, D. W.; Woo, H. C.; Chung, J. S. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 1998, 19, 233–243.
  19. Jia, L.; Qin, Y.; Ma, Z. Chin. J. Catal., 2003, 24, 751–754.
  20. Hebert, D. B. Catal., Rev. 1992, 34, 391–408.
  21. Hebert, D. B. Appl. Catal., 1988, 41, 289–299.
  22. Paik, S. C.; Kim, H.; Chung, J. S. Catal., Today 1997, 38, 193–198.
  23. Shukla, P. R.; Wang, S. B.; Sun, H. Q.; Ang, M.; Tad´ e, M. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 2010, 100, 529–534.
  24. Sun, W.; Hsu, A.; Chen, R. R. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, 627–635.
  25. Edwards, J. K.; Pritchard, J.; Piccinini, M.; Shaw, G.; He, Q.; Carley, A. F.; Kiely, C. J.; Hutchings, G. J. J. Catal., 2012, 292, 227–238.
  26. Liu, S. J.; Liu, Z. Y.; Zhu, Z. P.; Niu, H. X.; Hu, T. D.; Xie, Y. N.; Liu, T. Chin. J. Environ. Sci. 2000, 21, 12–17.
  27. Tseng, H. H.; Wey, M. Y. Carbon 2004, 42, 2269–2278.
  28. Zhu, Z. P.; Liu, Z. Y.; Liu, S. J.; Niu, H. X. Appl. Catal., B Environ. 1999, 23, L229–L233. Liu, S.; Liu, Z.; Zhu, Z.; Niu, H. Environ. Chem. 1999, 18, 519–524.