Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The effect(s) of SO 2 on the two types of active sites on Cu-SSZ-13 NH 3 –SCR catalysts, Z2Cu and ZCuOH, were investigated. Two Cu-SSZ-13 catalysts with Si:Al ratios of 6 and 30 were synthesized, and they provide very different distributions of these two active sites. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES), H 2 temperature-programmed reduction (H 2 -TPR), and diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy (DRIFTS) were utilized to characterize catalyst samples and quantify the amounts of total Cu, Z2Cu and ZCuOH. In situ DRIFTS results show that Z2Cu and ZCuOH responses to low-temperature (<200 °C) SO 2 poisoning were site-dependent. Results of SO 2 and SO 2 + NH 3 temperature-programmed desorption (TPD) and DRIFTS experiments, supplemented with DFT calculations, revealed that the different observed responses correspond to different sulfur intermediates that form. On Z2Cu sites, SO 2 only adsorbs when it is cofed with NH 3 via formation of ammonium sulfate, with its fingerprint TPD feature at 380 °C. However, low-temperature interaction between SO 2 and ZCuOH leads to copper bisulfite species formation, which can be further oxidized to form copper bisulfate with increasing temperature. In terms of low-temperature SCR functionality, the activity of both Cu-SSZ-13 samples were found to be significantly inhibited by SO 2 . However, in terms of regeneration (i.e., desulfation) behavior, Cu-SSZ-13 with a Si:Al = 30 (higher ZCuOH compared to Z2Cu) seemed to require higher desulfation temperatures (>550 °C). Therefore, compared with Z2Cu, ZCuOH sites are more susceptible to severe low-temperature SO 2 poisoning because of the formation of more stable bisulfite and ultimately bisulfate species.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jangjou et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: