Enhanced activity and SO₂ resistance of Co‐modified CeO₂‐TiO₂ catalyst prepared by facile co‐precipitation for elemental mercury removal in flue gas

Abstract

The Co‐modified CeO2‐TiO2 catalyst prepared by facile co‐precipitation was used for efficient elemental mercury oxidation in flue gas. Results indicated that Co doping greatly enhanced the activity and SO2 resistance of the CeO2‐TiO2 catalyst. In the presence of 5% O2, 500 ppm NO, 800 ppm SO2 and 3% H2O at 200 °C, the Hg0 removal efficiency of CeCo3/Ti could maintain at about 87% for a relatively long time. Characterizations of catalysts (BET, XRD, Raman spectroscopy, TEM, H2‐TPR, O2‐TPD, XPS, TG‐MS and SO2‐DRIFTS) were carried out to reveal the mechanism of Co modification on the redox ability, SO2 resistance and resultant mercury oxidation removal performance of catalyst. It was found that an interaction of Ce with Co promoted the dispersion of CeO2, increased chemisorbed oxygen concentration, and improved the oxygen storage capacity and the reducibility of catalyst, which was beneficial to the improvement of Hg0 oxidation removal. Hg0 would adsorb onto the catalyst and react with surface active oxygen species replenished by gas‐phase O2 to be oxidized via Mars‐Maessen mechanism. SO2 consumed the surface active oxygen species and resulted in the reduction of Ce4+ to Ce3+, which induced the deactivation of catalyst. The introduced Co in CeO2‐TiO2 catalyst exerted the function of protecting Ce4+ from being poisoned by SO2 and thus promoted the sulfur resistance and Hg0 removal performance of the catalyst in the presence of SO2.

Constructing Heterointerfaces in Dual-Phase High-Entropy Oxides to Boost O2 Activation and SO2 Resistance for Mercury Removal in Flue Gas

“…One of the key issues affecting the industrialization of Hg 0 removal catalysts is the inhibitory effect of SO 2 . Thus, we compared the performance of SO 2 resistance over Co–CeO 2 and Co-HEO.…”

“…One of the key issues affecting the industrialization of Hg 0 removal catalysts is the inhibitory effect of SO 2 . 42 Thus, we compared the performance of SO 2 resistance over Co−CeO 2 and Co-HEO. For Co−CeO 2 , Figure S6 shows a decrease in Hg 0 removal efficiency when 1000 ppm of SO 2 was added.…”

Promotion of SO2 resistance of Ce–La/TiO2 denitrification catalysts by V doping

“…Additives that also strengthened the water and sulfur resistance of the rare-earth-based catalysts helped them conduct denitrification even better. Many researchers have prepared binary-loaded metal oxide catalysts using transition metals and doping with rare earth elements such as CoO, 9 Cr 2 O 3 , 10 and Sm 2 O 3 . 11 This method boosted the denitrification activity of the original Ce-based catalysts as well as their resistance to water and sulfur.…”