CuO and CuO–ZnO catalysts supported on CeO2 and CeO2–LaO3 for low temperature water–gas shift reaction

Modified precipitation processes and optimized copper content of CuO–CeO 2 catalysts for water–gas shift reaction

“…A series of CuOeCeO 2 catalysts with different copper content (e.g., 10,15,20,25,30 wt.%, calculated as CuO) were prepared by co-precipitation. The detailed synthetic route is described as follows: stoichiometric amounts of Cu(NO 3 ) 2 $3H 2 O and Ce(NO 3 ) 3 $6H 2 O were first dissolved in 300 mL of deionized water, then the mixed aqueous solution were co-precipitated with about 400 mL of stoichiometric KOH solution, with vigorous stirring at T ¼ 80 C and PH ¼ 10 ± 1.…”

“…The CuO/CeO 2 catalyst with different copper content (e.g., 10,15,20,25 wt.%, calculated as CuO) was prepared by stepwise precipitation, which is a modified DP. The improvement of SP is described as follows: Stoichiometric amounts of Ce(N-O 3 ) 3 $6H 2 O solution were precipitated with stoichiometric KOH solution, a lilac suspension was acquired.…”

Preparation, Characterization and Optimization of High Surface Area Ce-La-Cu Ternary Oxide Nanoparticles

“…Given the importance of ternary oxide combinations, cerium-lanthanum-copper ternary oxide was studied in this research. Ternary combinations of Ce-La-Cu have been studied as catalyst in water-gas shift reaction [13][14][15], and wet oxidation of ammonia solution [16].…”

Physical Properties and Selective CO Oxidation of Coprecipitated CuO/CeO2Catalysts Depending on the CuO in the Samples

“…A multistep process requires for producing hydrogen on board usually accomplished by reform of hydrocarbons or methanol, followed by high and low temperature water gas shift reaction (WGSR) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Typical effluents from such a process contain 45-75% H 2 , 5-10% H 2 O, 10-20% CO 2 , and a considerably high 0.5-2% CO, which is known to poison the Pt-based fuel cell anode if exists over 100-10 ppm [6][7][8][9][10][11]. Preferential oxidation of carbon monoxide (CO-PROX) is being considered by many researchers as the simplest and most cost effective method for removing CO [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][12][13][14] .…”