Urea–nitrate combustion synthesis of CuO/CeO2 nanocatalysts toward low-temperature oxidation of CO: the effect of Red/Ox ratio
Source abstract
Abstract
The low-temperature catalytic oxidation of carbon monoxide (CO) is the key process to overcome incomplete combustion of fossil fuels for both commercial (e.g., lowering automotive emissions) and domestic (e.g., indoor air quality improvement) applications. So the development of cost-effective and high-active catalysts made from non-noble metals is an actual material science challenge. Ce–Cu–O oxide system is one of the most prospective to investigate due to the feasibility of the Langmuir–Hinshelwood dual-site oxidation mechanism, and, in our previous work, it was shown that solution combustion synthesis using the urea as fuel in stoichiometric ratio with metal nitrates is a most reasonable fuel choice toward the synthesis of CuO/CeO2 nanocatalysts for effective CO oxidation. In this work, the effect of the Red/Ox (urea to nitrates or U/N) ratio on the catalytic oxidation activity of resulting CuO/CeO2 composites is in the spotlight. Series of CuO/CeO2 nanocatalysts were successfully synthesized via the urea–nitrate combustion method with U/N ratios from 0.2 to 1.4 and then were applied for CO oxidation. The samples before and after catalysis were characterized by EDX, SEM, PXRD, N2-ASA, H2-TPR, etc. It was shown that the U/N ratio strongly affects the qualitative and quantitative X-ray phase composition (c-CeO2, m-CuO, and am-CuO, in general), CeO2 and CuO crystallite sizes (4.9–63.0 nm and 14.7–28.3 nm, correspondently), specific surface area (4–46 m2/g) and porosity (0.009–0.033 cm3/g), as well as the morphology of nanocomposites and their catalytic characteristics (t50% = 113–199 °C and t100% = 137–348 °C). The sample synthesized at U/N = 0.2 shows the best oxidative performance (t50% = 113 °C and t100% = 137 °C) explained by the highest surface (46 m2/g), the lowest CeO2 crystallite size (4.9 nm), and the lowest degree of agglomeration of nanocrystals in the CuO/CeO2 composite. Besides, cyclic and water resistivity tests of this sample confirm the high stability of its catalytic activity in the CO oxidation process due to the close conjugation of the CeO2 and CuO components in the resulting nanocomposite, confirmed by the H2-TPR analysis results. Thus, it was shown that the optimization of Red/Ox ratio in the urea–nitrate combustion process contributes to obtaining the stable CuO/CeO2 nanocatalyst with gradual conversion of CO at quite low temperatures (ti ~ 50 °C). We believe that the subsequent reduction of CuO loading in the Ce–Cu–O system allows creating a cost-effective and stable composite nanocatalyst with high activity even at room temperature.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Catalytic Processes in Materials Science · Catalysis and Oxidation Reactions · Copper-based nanomaterials and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (63)
Show source-provided references
1. Sun K (2016) Theoretical investigations on CO oxidation reaction catalyzed by gold nanoparticles. Chinese J Catal 37:1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2067(16)62476-210.1016/S1872-2067(16)62476-2 ↗
2. Punde SS, Tatarchuk BJ (2017) Pt-CeO2/SiO2 catalyst for CO oxidation in humid air at ambient temperature. Chinese J Catal 38:475–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2067(17)62749-910.1016/S1872-2067(17)62749-9 ↗
3. Lin J, Wang X, Zhang T (2016) Recent progress in CO oxidation over Pt-group-metal catalysts at low temperatures. Chinese J Catal 37:1805–1813. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2067(16)62513-510.1016/S1872-2067(16)62513-5 ↗
4. Yang Y, Hou F, Li H et al (2017) Facile synthesis of Ag/KIT-6 catalyst via a simple one-pot method and application in the CO oxidation. J Porous Mater 24:1661–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10934-017-0406-110.1007/s10934-017-0406-1 ↗
5. Zhang X, Yang Y, Song L et al (2018) High and stable catalytic activity of Ag/Fe2O3 catalysts derived from MOFs for CO oxidation. Mol Catal 447:80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcat.2018.01.00710.1016/j.mcat.2018.01.007 ↗
6. Zhang X, Yang Y, Lv X et al (2017) Effects of preparation method on the structure and catalytic activity of Ag–Fe2O3 catalysts derived from MOFs. Catalysts 7(12):382. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal712038210.3390/catal7120382 ↗
7. Harrison PG, Ball IK, Azelee W et al (2000) Nature and surface redox properties of copper(II)-promoted cerium(IV) oxide CO-oxidation catalysts. Chem Mater 12:3715–3725. https://doi.org/10.1021/cm001113k10.1021/cm001113k ↗
8. Sedmak G, Hočevar S, Levec J (2004) Transient kinetic model of CO oxidation over a nanostructured Cu0.1Ce0.9O2−y catalyst. J Catal 222:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcat.2003.10.00610.1016/j.jcat.2003.10.006 ↗
9. Guo T, Du J, Li J (2016) The effects of ceria morphology on the properties of Pd/ceria catalyst for catalytic oxidation of low-concentration methane. J Mater Sci 51:10917–10925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-016-0303-z10.1007/s10853-016-0303-z ↗
10. Vinothkumar G, Amalraj R, Babu KS (2017) Fuel-oxidizer ratio tuned luminescence properties of combustion synthesized Europium doped cerium oxide nanoparticles and its effect on antioxidant properties. Ceram Int 43:5457–5466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.01.05310.1016/j.ceramint.2017.01.053 ↗
11. Gobara HM, Aboutaleb WA, Hashem KM et al (2017) A novel route for the synthesis of α-Fe2O3–CeO2 nanocomposites for ethanol conversion. J Mater Sci 52:550–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-016-0353-210.1007/s10853-016-0353-2 ↗
12. Mueen R, Morlando A, Qutaish H et al (2020) ZnO/CeO2 nanocomposite with low photocatalytic activity as efficient UV filters. J Mater Sci 55:6834–6847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-020-04493-x10.1007/s10853-020-04493-x ↗
13. Lermontov SA, Malkova AN, Yurkova LL et al (2013) Sulfated nano-ceria as a catalyst of Hex-1-Ene oligomerization. Nanosyst Phys Chem Math 4(5):690–695
14. Cecilia J, Arango-Díaz A, Marrero-Jerez J et al (2017) Catalytic behaviour of CuO–CeO2 systems prepared by different synthetic methodologies in the CO-PROX reaction under CO2–H2O feed stream. Catalysts 7:160. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal705016010.3390/catal7050160 ↗
15. Shang H, Zhang X, Xu J, Han Y (2017) Effects of preparation methods on the activity of CuO/CeO2 catalysts for CO oxidation. Front Chem Sci Eng 11:603–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-017-1661-z10.1007/s11705-017-1661-z ↗
16. Zhang C, Song W, Zhang X et al (2019) Synthesis of CeO2-modified activated carbon spheres by grafting and coordinating reactions for elemental mercury removal. J Mater Sci 54:2836–2852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-018-3019-410.1007/s10853-018-3019-4 ↗
17. Lomanova NA, Tomkovich MV, Sokolov VV et al (2018) Thermal and magnetic behavior of BiFeO3 nanoparticles prepared by glycine-nitrate combustion. J Nanoparticle Res 20(2):17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-018-4125-610.1007/s11051-018-4125-6 ↗
18. Zvereva VV, Popkov VI (2019) Synthesis of CeO2–Fe2O3 nanocomposites via controllable oxidation of CeFeO3 nanocrystals. Ceram Int 45:12516–12520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.03.18810.1016/j.ceramint.2019.03.188 ↗
19. Tugova E, Yastrebov S, Karpov O, Smith R (2017) NdFeO3 nanocrystals under glycine nitrate combustion formation. J Cryst Growth 467:88–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2017.03.02210.1016/j.jcrysgro.2017.03.022 ↗
20. Zaboeva EA, Izotova SG, Popkov VI (2016) Glycine-nitrate combustion synthesis of CeFeO3-based nanocrystalline powders. Russ J Appl Chem 89:1228–1236. https://doi.org/10.1134/s107042721608003610.1134/s1070427216080036 ↗
21. Popkov VI, Tolstoy VP, Omarov SO, Nevedomskiy VN (2019) Enhancement of acidic-basic properties of silica by modification with CeO2–Fe2O3 nanoparticles via successive ionic layer deposition. Appl Surf Sci 473:313–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2018.12.12910.1016/j.apsusc.2018.12.129 ↗
22. Bachina A, Ivanov VA, Popkov VI (2017) Peculiarities of LaFeO3 nanocrystals formation via glycine-nitrate combustion. Nanosyst Phys Chem Math 8:647–653. https://doi.org/10.17586/2220-8054-2017-8-5-647-65310.17586/2220-8054-2017-8-5-647-653 ↗
23. Kondrashkova IS, Martinson KD, Zakharova NV, Popkov VI (2018) Synthesis of nanocrystalline HoFeO3 photocatalyst via heat treatment of products of glycine-nitrate combustion. Russ J Gen Chem 88:2465–2471. https://doi.org/10.1134/S107036321812002210.1134/S1070363218120022 ↗
24. Martinson KD, Kondrashkova IS, Omarov SO et al (2020) Magnetically recoverable catalyst based on porous nanocrystalline HoFeO3 for processes of n-hexane conversion. Adv Powder Technol 31:402–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2019.10.03310.1016/j.apt.2019.10.033 ↗
25. Jung CR, Han J, Nam SW et al (2004) Selective oxidation of CO over CuO–CeO2 catalyst: effect of calcination temperature. Catal Today 93–95:183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.03910.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.039 ↗
26. Yu W, Zhou Q, Wang H et al (2020) Selective removal of CO from hydrocarbon-rich industrial off-gases over CeO2-supported metal oxides. J Mater Sci 55:2321–2332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-019-04114-210.1007/s10853-019-04114-2 ↗
27. Liu Y, Fu Q, Stephanopoulos MF (2004) Preferential oxidation of CO in H2 over CuO–CeO2 catalysts. Catal Today 93–95:241–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.04910.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.049 ↗
28. Sun J, Zhang L, Ge C et al (2014) Comparative study on the catalytic CO oxidation properties of CuO/CeO2 catalysts prepared by solid-state and wet impregnation. Chinese J Catal 35:1347–1358. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2067(14)60138-810.1016/S1872-2067(14)60138-8 ↗
29. Venkataswamy P, Jampaiah D, Mukherjee D, Reddy BM (2019) CuO/Zn–CeO2 nanocomposite as an efficient catalyst for enhanced diesel soot oxidation. Emiss Control Sci Technol 5:328–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40825-019-00137-y10.1007/s40825-019-00137-y ↗
30. Tang X, Zhang B, Li Y et al (2004) Carbon monoxide oxidation over CuO/CeO2 catalysts. Catal Today 93–95:191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.04010.1016/j.cattod.2004.06.040 ↗
31. Avgouropoulos G, Ioannides T, Papadopoulou C et al (2002) A comparative study of Pt/γ-Al2O3, Au/α-Fe2O3 and CuO–CeO2 catalysts for the selective oxidation of carbon monoxide in excess hydrogen. Catal Today 75:157–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5861(02)00058-510.1016/S0920-5861(02)00058-5 ↗
32. Avgouropoulos G, Ioannides T (2003) Selective CO oxidation over CuO–CeO2 catalysts prepared via the urea-nitrate combustion method. Appl Catal A Gen 244:155–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-860X(02)00558-610.1016/S0926-860X(02)00558-6 ↗
33. Delimaris D, Ioannides T (2009) VOC oxidation over CuO–CeO2 catalysts prepared by a combustion method. Appl Catal B Environ 89:295–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2009.02.00310.1016/j.apcatb.2009.02.003 ↗
34. Minaei S, Haghighi M, Jodeiri N et al (2017) Urea-nitrates combustion preparation of CeO2-promoted CuO/ZnO/Al2O3 nanocatalyst for fuel cell grade hydrogen production via methanol steam reforming. Adv Powder Technol 28:842–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2016.12.01010.1016/j.apt.2016.12.010 ↗
35. Yang Y, Dong H, Wang Y et al (2017) A facile synthesis for porous CuO/Cu2O composites derived from MOFs and their superior catalytic performance for CO oxidation. Inorg Chem Commun 86:74–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2017.09.02710.1016/j.inoche.2017.09.027 ↗
36. Yang Y, Dong H, Wang Y et al (2018) Synthesis of octahedral like Cu-BTC derivatives derived from MOF calcined under different atmosphere for application in CO oxidation. J Solid State Chem 258:582–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2017.11.03310.1016/j.jssc.2017.11.033 ↗
37. Zhang X, Hou F, Li H et al (2018) A strawsheave-like metal-organic framework Ce-BTC derivative containing high specific surface area for improving the catalytic activity of CO oxidation reaction. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 259:211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2017.10.01910.1016/j.micromeso.2017.10.019 ↗
38. Zhang X, Hou F, Yang Y et al (2017) A facile synthesis for cauliflower like CeO2 catalysts from Ce-BTC precursor and their catalytic performance for CO oxidation. Appl Surf Sci 423:771–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.06.23510.1016/j.apsusc.2017.06.235 ↗
39. Cui L, Zhao D, Yang Y et al (2017) Synthesis of highly efficient α-Fe2O3 catalysts for CO oxidation derived from MIL-100(Fe). J Solid State Chem 247:168–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2017.01.01310.1016/j.jssc.2017.01.013 ↗
40. Zhang X, Li H, Hou F et al (2017) Synthesis of highly efficient Mn2O3 catalysts for CO oxidation derived from Mn-MIL-100. Appl Surf Sci 411:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.03.17910.1016/j.apsusc.2017.03.179 ↗
41. Zhang X, Li H, Lv X et al (2018) Facile synthesis of highly efficient amorphous Mn-MIL-100 catalysts: formation mechanism and structure changes during application in CO oxidation. Chem Eur J 24:8822–8832. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.20180077310.1002/chem.201800773 ↗
42. Luong NT, Okumura H, Yamasue E, Ishihara KN (2019) Structure and catalytic behavior of CuO–CeO2 prepared by high-energy ball milling. R Soc Open Sci 6(2):181861. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.18186110.1098/rsos.181861 ↗
43. Wang X, Qin M, Fang F et al (2017) Effect of glycine on one-step solution combustion synthesis of magnetite nanoparticles. J Alloys Compd 719:288–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.05.18710.1016/j.jallcom.2017.05.187 ↗
44. Cam TS, Vishnievskaia TA, Popkov VI (2020) Catalytic oxidation of CO over CuO/CeO2 nanocomposites synthesized via solution combustion method: effect of fuels. Rev Adv Mater Sci 59:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/rams-2020-000210.1515/rams-2020-0002 ↗
45. Deshpande K, Mukasyan A, Varma A (2004) Direct synthesis of iron oxide nanopowders by the combustion approach: reaction mechanism and properties. Chem Mater 16:4896–4904. https://doi.org/10.1021/cm040061m10.1021/cm040061m ↗
46. Cam TS, Petrova AE, Ugolkov VL, Sladkovskiy DA, Popkov VI (2020) On the SCS approach to the CeO2/CuO nanocomposite: thermochemical aspects and catalytic activity in n-hexane conversion. Russ J Inorg Chem 65(5):725–732. https://doi.org/10.1134/S003602362005004610.1134/S0036023620050046 ↗
47. Thomas A, Janáky C, Samu GF et al (2015) Time- and energy-efficient solution combustion synthesis of binary metal tungstate nanoparticles with enhanced photocatalytic activity. ChemSusChem 8:1652–1663. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.20150038310.1002/cssc.201500383 ↗
48. Mukasyan AS, Epstein P, Dinka P (2007) Solution combustion synthesis of nanomaterials. Proc Combust Inst 31:1789–1795. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCI.2006.07.05210.1016/J.PROCI.2006.07.052 ↗
49. Kormányos A, Thomas A, Huda MN et al (2016) Solution combustion synthesis, characterization, and photoelectrochemistry of CuNb2O6 and ZnNb2O6 nanoparticles. J Phys Chem C 120:16024–16034. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b1273810.1021/acs.jpcc.5b12738 ↗
50. Li FT, Ran J, Jaroniec M, Qiao SZ (2015) Solution combustion synthesis of metal oxide nanomaterials for energy storage and conversion. Nanoscale 7:17590–17610. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5nr05299h10.1039/c5nr05299h ↗
51. Varma A, Mukasyan AS, Rogachev AS, Manukyan KV (2016) Solution combustion synthesis of nanoscale materials. Chem Rev 116:14493–14586. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b0027910.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00279 ↗
52. Komlev AA, Gusarov VV (2014) Glycine-nitrate combustion synthesis of nonstoichiometric Mg–Fe spinel nanopowders. Inorg Mater 50:1247–1251. https://doi.org/10.1134/s002016851412010310.1134/s0020168514120103 ↗
53. Popkov VI, Tolstoy VP, Nevedomskiy VN (2019) Peroxide route to the synthesis of ultrafine CeO2–Fe2O3 nanocomposite via successive ionic layer deposition. Heliyon 5(3):e01443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e0144310.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01443 ↗
54. Kotlovanova NE, Matveeva AN, Omarov SO et al (2018) Formation and acid-base surface properties of highly dispersed η-Al2O3 nanopowders. Inorg Mater 54:392–400. https://doi.org/10.1134/s002016851804005210.1134/s0020168518040052 ↗
55. Gómez-Cortés A, Márquez Y, Arenas-Alatorre J, Díaz G (2008) Selective CO oxidation in excess of H2 over high-surface-area CuO/CeO2 catalysts. Catal Today 133–135:743–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2007.12.08310.1016/j.cattod.2007.12.083 ↗
56. Wang S, Li Q, Chen F et al (2017) HEPES-mediated controllable synthesis of hierarchical CuO nanostructures and their analogous photo-Fenton and antibacterial performance. Adv Powder Technol 28:1332–1339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2017.03.00110.1016/j.apt.2017.03.001 ↗
57. Guoxing C, Qiaoling LI, Yucai WEI et al (2013) Low-temperature CO oxidation on Ni-promoted CuO–CeO2 catalysts. Chinese J Catal 34:322–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2067(11)60468-310.1016/S1872-2067(11)60468-3 ↗
58. Ilves VG, Murzakaev AM, Sokovnin SY (2018) On the interrelationship of porosity and structural defects in amorphous-crystalline nanopowders SiO2-doped Gd2O3 with their magnetic and luminescent properties. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 271:203–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2018.05.04410.1016/j.micromeso.2018.05.044 ↗
59. Wang Z, Niu Z, Hao Q et al (2019) Enhancing the ethynylation performance of CuO–Bi2O3 nanocatalysts by tuning Cu–Bi interactions and phase structures. Catalysts 9(1):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal901003510.3390/catal9010035 ↗
60. He D, Chen D, Hao H et al (2016) Structural/surface characterization and catalytic evaluation of rare earth (Y, Sm and La) doped ceria composite oxides for CH3SH catalytic decomposition. Appl Surf Sci 390:959–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.08.12910.1016/j.apsusc.2016.08.129 ↗
61. Yao X, Gao F, Yu Q et al (2013) NO reduction by CO over CuO–CeO2 catalysts: effect of preparation methods. Catal Sci Technol 3:1355–1366. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3cy20805b10.1039/c3cy20805b ↗
62. Zhang XM, Deng YQ, Tian P et al (2016) Dynamic active sites over binary oxide catalysts: in situ/operando spectroscopic study of low-temperature CO oxidation over MnOx–CeO2 catalysts. Appl Catal B Environ 191:179–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2016.03.03010.1016/j.apcatb.2016.03.030 ↗
63. Lakshmanan P, Park E (2018) Preferential CO oxidation in H2 over Au/La2O3/Al2O3 catalysts: the effect of the catalyst reduction method. Catalysts 8(5):183. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal805018310.3390/catal8050183 ↗