The present work investigates the sustainable production of high-purity hydrogen through sorption enhanced steam reforming of glycerol (SESRG) over Ca 9 Al 6 O 18 –CaO/ x NiO ( x = 15, 20, and 25 wt %) and Ca 9 Al 6 O 18 –CaO/20NiO– y CeO 2 ( y = 5, 10, and 15 wt %) bifunctional catalyst-sorbent materials. A wet mixing method involving limestone acidification coupled with two-step calcination was employed to prepare the bifunctional materials. Cyclic carbonation/calcination tests revealed that the bifunctional materials promoted with 10 and 15 wt % of CeO 2 possessed an excellent CaO conversion (97% in both cases) and a remarkable cyclic stability (up to 15 cycles). This was mainly attributed to the thin shell-connected structure formed by the addition of CeO 2 and the oxygen mobility characteristic of CeO 2 . The use of Ca 9 Al 6 O 18 –CaO/ x NiO materials in five consecutive SESRG/regeneration cycles revealed that they suffered from fast deactivation mainly due to CaO sintering and coke deposition. Despite the high H 2 purity obtained (∼98%), the prebreakthrough time and hydrogen yield decreased significantly over five cycles. Interestingly, the addition of CeO 2 to the most efficient catalyst (Ca 9 Al 6 O 18 –CaO/20NiO) resulted in a significant improvement in material stability during cyclic operation. The performance of CeO 2 -promoted materials was shown to depend strongly on the CeO 2 content which controlled the number of adjacent Ni active sites, the amount of coke deposition, and the degree of CaO sintering. The bifunctional material promoted with 10 wt % of CeO 2 showed the best performance over five consecutive SESRG/regeneration cycles, with a stable H 2 purity of ∼98%, H 2 yield of ∼91%, and prebreakthrough time of 48 min. The long-term cyclic stability test of Ca 9 Al 6 O 18 –CaO/20NiO–10CeO 2 over 20 cycles exhibited a very stable performance with a H 2 yield of 91% and H 2 purity of 98% within 20 cycles, confirming the high potential of this material for SESRG process.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yancheshmeh et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: