2018
DOI: 10.1007/s12204-018-2017-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Catalytic Combustion of Lean Methane Assisted by Electric Field over Pd/Co3O4 Catalysts at Low Temperature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…36,58,68 The potential would further activate the chemisorbed oxygen, enhancing the surface reaction of eq 4, which is similar to the recently published enhanced catalyst reaction by electric field. 69 Therefore, all the enhanced ethanol adsorption, rh-phase stabilization, rh(104) facet exposure, and enhanced surface reaction by Sr doping contribute to the high ethanol sensing performance of the homojunction c-In 2 O 3 /rh-In 2 O 3 NWs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…36,58,68 The potential would further activate the chemisorbed oxygen, enhancing the surface reaction of eq 4, which is similar to the recently published enhanced catalyst reaction by electric field. 69 Therefore, all the enhanced ethanol adsorption, rh-phase stabilization, rh(104) facet exposure, and enhanced surface reaction by Sr doping contribute to the high ethanol sensing performance of the homojunction c-In 2 O 3 /rh-In 2 O 3 NWs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using relatively aggressive activations, successful conversions of 1000−10,000 ppmv methane (0.1−1% CH 4 , with 10% or less oxygen) at temperatures well below the ignition point (600 °C50 ) have been recorded 31,33,34,36,38 with a few demonstrating conversion temperatures as low as 300 °C. 32,35 While the reaction temperatures we observed are moderately lower than previous demonstrations, the dramatically different activation procedures and simplified catalyst synthesis offer unique benefits. As a point of comparison, conversion efficiencies to CO 2 are not often reported and cannot be directly compared to our results; nevertheless, methanol production rates in previous studies have been quite low (order 0.1−0.3 mol methanol per mol Cu or less; 26 methanol production was not systematically quantified in our study, but early spot checks in the two-step process revealed around 1−2 orders of magnitude lower methanol in the post-reaction, water-extracted catalyst, where the input methane was around 10 6 -fold lower than in previous studies).…”
Section: Methane Conversion Approachmentioning
confidence: 69%