Methane storage using metal–dipyrazolate frameworks
Source abstract
Abstract
Adsorbed natural gas storage using porous materials at ambient temperature and relatively low pressure promises to address safety and cost concerns of conventional natural gas storage technologies (liquefaction and compression), but its utility is hindered by low deliverable capacity. Flexible porous materials such as metal–organic frameworks can exhibit isotherms with the potential to afford enhanced deliverable capacity. However, prototypal flexible adsorbed natural gas sorbents, exemplified by the metal–organic framework cobalt benzenedipyrazolate, Co(bdp), suffer from hydrolytic instability and are unsuitable for pelletization. Here we report a family of metal–bipyrazolate frameworks, including hydrophobic sorbents, Zn(dpt) and Co(dpt) (H2dpt = 2,5-di(1H-pyrazol-4-yl)thiophene), that exhibit methane-induced reversible transformations between narrow-pore and large-pore phases. Zn(dpt) shows exceptionally high methane deliverable capacities for 5–35 and 5–65 bar, that is, 173 cm3 (STP) cm−3 and 225 cm3 (STP) cm−3, respectively, but, unlike Co(bdp), is hydrolytically stable. In situ structural characterization, high-pressure gas sorption and modelling provide an insight into the narrow-pore–large-pore transformations, whereas testing with 250-ml tanks reveals that Zn(dpt) retains high deliverable capacity over multiple cycles. We demonstrate a practical alternative to pelletization through a formulation approach that is probably generally suitable for flexible sorbents. Reversible phase transformations enable flexible metal–bipyrazolate frameworks to offer high deliverable methane capacities, high stability and recyclability, indicating utility in natural gas storage.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal-Organic Frameworks: Synthesis and Applications · Covalent Organic Framework Applications · Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. January 2023 Monthly Energy Review (US Energy Information Administration, 2023); https://www.eia.gov/TOTALENERGY/data/monthly/archive/00352301.pdf
2. U.S. Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2022 (US Energy Information Administration, 2022); https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/archive/2022/
3. Lin, Y., Kong, C., Zhang, Q. & Chen, L. Metal-organic frameworks for carbon dioxide capture and methane storage. Adv. Energy Mater. 7, 1601296 (2016).10.1002/aenm.201601296 ↗
4. Schoedel, A., Ji, Z. & Yaghi, O. M. The role of metal–organic frameworks in a carbon-neutral energy cycle. Nat. Energy 1, 16034 (2016).10.1038/nenergy.2016.34 ↗
5. Wang, Z. et al. A review on high-density methane storage in confined nanospace by adsorption-hydration hybrid technology. J. Energy Storage 50, 104195 (2022).10.1016/j.est.2022.104195 ↗
6. Mason, J. A., Veenstra, M. & Long, J. R. Evaluating metal–organic frameworks for natural gas storage. Chem. Sci. 5, 32–51 (2014).10.1039/C3SC52633J ↗
7. Simon, C. M. et al. The materials genome in action: identifying the performance limits for methane storage. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 1190–1199 (2015).10.1039/C4EE03515A ↗
8. Li, B., Wen, H.-M., Zhou, W., Xu, J. Q. & Chen, B. Porous metal-organic frameworks: promising materials for methane storage. Chem 1, 557–580 (2016).10.1016/j.chempr.2016.09.009 ↗
9. Kong, X. J., Si, G. R., He, T. & Li, J. R. Metal pyrazolate frameworks: crystal engineering access to stable functional materials. Chem. Soc. Rev. 54, 3647–3680 (2025).10.1039/D4CS00989D ↗
10. Yin, Y. et al. Ultrahigh-surface area covalent organic frameworks for methane adsorption. Science 386, 693–696 (2024).10.1126/science.adr0936 ↗
11. Chen, Z. et al. Balancing volumetric and gravimetric uptake in highly porous materials for clean energy. Science 368, 297–303 (2020).10.1126/science.aaz8881 ↗
12. Yu, B. et al. Single-crystalline 3D covalent organic frameworks with exceptionally high specific surface areas and gas storage capacities. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 146, 28932–28940 (2024).10.1021/jacs.4c09680 ↗
13. Mason, J. A. et al. Methane storage in flexible metal–organic frameworks with intrinsic thermal management. Nature 527, 357–361 (2015).10.1038/nature15732 ↗
14. Forrest, K. A. et al. Methane storage in flexible and dynamical metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Phys. Rev. 3, 021308 (2022).10.1063/5.0072805 ↗
15. Kidnay, A. J., Parrish, W. R. & McCartney, D. G. in Fundamentals of Natural Gas Processing 3rd edn 121–147 (CRC, 2019).10.1201/9780429464942-6 ↗
16. Moulton, B. & Zaworotko, M. J. From molecules to crystal engineering: supramolecular isomerism and polymorphism in network solids. Chem. Rev. 101, 1629–1658 (2001).10.1021/cr9900432 ↗
17. Taylor, M. K. et al. Tuning the adsorption-induced phase change in the flexible metal-organic framework Co(bdp). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138, 15019–15026 (2016).10.1021/jacs.6b09155 ↗
18. He, T. et al. Trace removal of benzene vapour using double-walled metal-dipyrazolate frameworks. Nat. Mater. 21, 689–695 (2022).10.1038/s41563-022-01237-x ↗
19. Itodo, A. U., Itodo, H. U. & Gafar, M. K. Estimation of specific surface area using Langmuir isotherm method. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage. 14, 141–145 (2010).
20. Yang, Q. Y. et al. Reversible switching between highly porous and nonporous phases of an interpenetrated diamondoid coordination network that exhibits gate-opening at methane storage pressures. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 57, 5684–5689 (2018).10.1002/anie.201800820 ↗
21. Wang, S.-Q., Darwish, S., Sensharma, D. & Zaworotko, M. J. Tuning the switching pressure in square lattice coordination networks by metal cation substitution. Mater. Adv. 3, 1240–1247 (2022).10.1039/D1MA00785H ↗
22. Nikolayenko, V. I. et al. Reversible transformations between the non-porous phases of a flexible coordination network enabled by transient porosity. Nat. Chem. 15, 542–549 (2023).10.1038/s41557-022-01128-3 ↗
23. Schneemann, A. et al. Flexible metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43, 6062–6096 (2014).10.1039/C4CS00101J ↗
24. Peng, Y. et al. Methane storage in metal–organic frameworks: current records, surprise findings, and challenges. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 11887–11894 (2013).10.1021/ja4045289 ↗
25. Nath, K., Ahmed, A., Siegel, D. J. & Matzger, A. J. Computational identification and experimental demonstration of high-performance methane sorbents. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202203575 (2022).10.1002/anie.202203575 ↗
26. Zhang, M. et al. Fine tuning of MOF-505 analogues to reduce low-pressure methane uptake and enhance methane working capacity. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56, 11426–11430 (2017).10.1002/anie.201704974 ↗
27. Gandara, F., Furukawa, H., Lee, S. & Yaghi, O. M. High methane storage capacity in aluminum metal–organic frameworks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136, 5271–5274 (2014).10.1021/ja501606h ↗
28. Li, B. et al. A porous metal–organic framework with dynamic pyrimidine groups exhibiting record high methane storage working capacity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136, 6207–6210 (2014).10.1021/ja501810r ↗
29. Yan, Y. et al. Porous metal-organic polyhedral frameworks with optimal molecular dynamics and pore geometry for methane storage. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139, 13349–13360 (2017).10.1021/jacs.7b05453 ↗
30. De, A., Maliuta, M., Senkovska, I. & Kaskel, S. The dilemma of reproducibility of gating isotherms for flexible MOFs. Langmuir 38, 14073–14083 (2022).10.1021/acs.langmuir.2c01999 ↗
31. Lin, J. M. et al. A metal-organic framework with a pore size/shape suitable for strong binding and close packing of methane. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 4674–4678 (2016).10.1002/anie.201511006 ↗
32. Gumma, S. & Talu, O. Net adsorption: a thermodynamic framework for supercritical gas adsorption and storage in porous solids. Langmuir 26, 17013–17023 (2010).10.1021/la102186q ↗
33. Waterman, K. C. in Handbook of Stability Testing in Pharmaceutical Development: Regulations, Methodologies, and Best Practices (ed. Huynh-Ba, K.) 115–135 (Springer, 2009).
34. Kumar, N. et al. Breaking the trade-off between selectivity and adsorption capacity for gas separation. Chem 7, 3085–3098 (2021).10.1016/j.chempr.2021.07.007 ↗