SiO2 Catalyst - ACS Publications

Research Article pubs.acs.org/journal/ascecg

Cite This: ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 10248-10257

Dry Reforming of Model Biogas on a Ni/SiO2 Catalyst: Overall Performance and Mechanisms of Sulfur Poisoning and Regeneration Xuejing Chen,†,‡ Jianguo Jiang,*,†,§,∥ Feng Yan,† Kaimin Li,† Sicong Tian,† Yuchen Gao,† and Hui Zhou‡ †

School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, United States § Key Laboratory for Solid Waste Management and Environment Safety, Ministry of Education of China, Beijing 100084, China ∥ Collaborative Innovation Center for Regional Environmental Quality, Beijing 100084, China ‡

S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Carbon-neutral application of renewable biogas to valuable chemical raw materials has received much attention in sustainable areas, while sulfur poisoning remains a big problem in biogas dry reforming process. In this work, sulfur deactivation and regeneration performance of a Ni/SiO2 catalyst in model biogas dry reforming and related mechanisms were studied. The effects of H2S content (50 and 100 ppm) and reaction temperature (700−800 °C) on biogas dry reforming were investigated. Three regeneration methods (H2S feeding cessation, temperature-programmed calcination (TPC), and O2 activation) were applied. The results showed that the presence of H2S caused server deactivation in catalytic activity, and higher H2S content led to faster deactivation. The deactivation was not reversed simply by stopping H2S feeding and TPC, but O2 activation could totally recover deactivated catalysts. The formation of Ni7S6, detected for the first time in biogas conditioning catalytic processes, confirmed by X-ray diffraction and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, led to sulfur poisoning, as well as catalyst sintering and carbon deposition. This work revealed that sulfur poisoning and regeneration mechanism is the formation and elimination of Ni7S6, and concluded that oxygen activation was the most effective method for reviving the catalytic activity, preventing sintering, and reducing carbon deposition. These findings will contribute to the industrial application of syngas production from biogas dry reforming. KEYWORDS: Biogas, Dry reforming, Sulfur poisoning, Regeneration, Nickel sulfide (Ni−S)

■

INTRODUCTION

consumption of H2 and production of CO, thus decreasing the H2/CO ratio.10,11

Biogas, an important renewable source of green energy, is produced from the anaerobic digestion of biomass, including landfill, food waste, and municipal sludge. With increasing concerns over climate change caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions, the carbon-neutral application of biogas to valuable chemical raw materials has received much attention. Biogas dry reforming can convert the two main greenhouse gases (GHGs) to syngas (H2 and CO), which are valuable energy-related chemicals (eq 1). This process has both environmental and commercial benefits.1−4 A typical biogas from municipal solid waste contains 50−75% CH4, 25−50% CO2, 0−10% N2, and 0−3% H2S.5 The H2S impurities in biogas may poison catalysts, especially when nonprecious metals (mainly Ni) are used, which is a major concern in biogas dry reforming.6,7 Catalyst deactivation can also be caused by carbon deposition, which is mainly caused by CH4 decomposition (eq 2) and CO disproportionation (eq 3).3,8,9 In addition, an important side reaction, the reverse water gas shift (RWGS, eq 4), usually occurs simultaneously with dry reforming, leading to additional © 2017 American Chemical Society

CH4 + CO2 → 2CO + 2H 2 ;

ΔH298K = 247 kJ mol−1 (1)

CH4 → CS + 2H 2 ; 2CO → CS + CO2 ;

ΔH298K = 75 kJ mol−1 ΔH298K = − 172 kJ mol−1

CO2 + H 2 → CO + H 2O;

(2) (3)

ΔH298K = 41 kJ mol−1 (4)

The sulfur poisoning effect of nickel-based catalysts was first studied in the catalytic process of biomass/coal gasification12,13 and steam reforming.5,14−16 Recently, sulfur poisoning in the dry reforming process has also been investigated1,6 because sulfur impurities are inevitably produced during the process of Received: July 6, 2017 Revised: August 4, 2017 Published: September 25, 2017 10248

DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02251 ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 10248−10257

Research Article

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering

h were applied for support pretreatment. A SiO2 supported catalyst with a Ni loading of 10 wt %, was synthesized by wet impregnation. A 5 g amount of calcined SiO2 was dispersed into 50 mL of ethanol under ultrasonic oscillation, and Ni(NO3)2·6H2O (99%, SigmaAldrich, St Louis, MO, USA) was dissolved into 50 mL of ethanol to obtain the active metal precursor. Then, the two solutions were mixed together using a magnetic stirrer at 70 °C at a rotation rate of 650 rpm for ∼12 h to evaporate the ethanol. The supported catalyst powders were further dried at 60 °C in a vacuum oven for 2 h, followed by a TPC procedure to 800 °C in an air flow of 30 mL min−1. Finally, catalyst powders were tableted and screened to obtain particles of 0.42−0.84 mm for catalytic testing. Dry Reforming Experiments. The biogas dry reforming experiments were conducted in a fixed-bed quartz reactor (inner diameter, 6 mm; outer diameter, 8 mm; length, 520 mm) heated by an electric furnace. Catalyst particles (0.42−0.84 mm, 100 mg) were loaded into the center of the reactor beside a K-type thermocouple to detect temperatures. Four flows of gas feeding, including reducing gas (10 vol % H2 in N2 balance), model biogas mixture (CH4/CO2/N2 = 0.4:0.4:0.2), model H2S mixture (200 ppmv H2S in N2 balance), and standard air, were controlled by four separate mass flow controllers (MFC). The outlet gas mixture underwent a cooling water circulation process before being analyzed by an online micro-GC apparatus (Micro 490, Agilent), which is equipped with two independent channels installed with a molecular sieve 5A PLOT column and a PoraPLOT U column, respectively, coupling with two thermal conductivity detectors (TCD). N2 was used as the internal standard gas for calibration. Figure S1 (Supporting Information) shows the experimental setup of the fixed-bed reactor for the biogas reforming process. Before each test, the catalyst samples were reduced in situ using a 10 vol % H2 in N2 balance of 30 mL min−1 by heating from room temperature (RT) to 800 °C at a rate of 10 °C min−1, followed by a steady state at 800 °C for 60 min. After the reduction, the temperature was lowered to the initial activity test temperature. For H2S tolerance tests, three temperatures (700, 750, and 800 °C) and two H2S concentrations (50 and 100 ppmv) were used. First, model biogas without H2S was introduced for about 30 min to obtain the original activity. Different H2S contents were then introduced, and the deactivation of catalysts was observed. The H2S feeding was stopped when the conversion of CH4 and CO2 dropped to ∼5%. The biogas dry reforming process was then continued to determine whether the activity could be regenerated by stopping in situ H2S feeding. Table S1 (Supporting Information) shows the gas components of biogas with different H2S concentrations. During biogas dry reforming process, the flow rates of CH4 and CO2 were always kept at 40 mL min−1, which made the gas hourly space velocity (GHSV) stable at 24,000 mL g−1 h−1. In addition to stopping the in situ H2S feeding, two other methods were also applied to study the regeneration of deactivated catalysts. One was the TPC method, during which the deactivated catalysts were calcined from RT to 800 °C with a temperature ramp of 10 °C min−1, followed by an isothermal step at 800 °C for 30 min. The overall TPC process was conducted under a N2 stream of 30 mL min−1. The activity was then tested under related temperatures. Oxygen activation was also applied, in which the deactivated catalysts were calcined in standard air (50 mL min−1) from RT to 800 °C by a temperature ramp of 10 °C min−1 and kept in an isothermal state for 30 min; then, the catalysts were reduced using a reducing gas (50 mL min−1) at 800 °C for 1 h. After regeneration, the catalytic activity tests were kept on stream for 70 min. The conversion (X) of CH4 and CO2 and the H2/ CO ratio were calculated by eqs 6−8:

biogas production, and the presence of even low sulfur levels after desulfurization may lead to the deactivation of nickel catalysts.17,18 It has been accepted for decades that catalysts can be deactivated by sulfur via the chemisorption of sulfur with active metal to form metal sulfides (eq 5), which occupy the surface active sites, deactivating the catalyst.17,19−21 However, the detailed sulfur poisoning performance and mechanism in a biogas dry reforming process with regard to the formation and elimination of Ni−S species still remains unclear. H 2S + Ni ⇄ Ni−S + H 2

(5) 14

According to Ashraf et al., a high H2S/H2 ratio is responsible for the formation of bulk sulfide, and only surface nickel sulfide (Ni−S) is formed at a low H2S/H2 ratio. The Ni−S species that are formed have been mostly represented as Ni3S2 in the literature;20,22 however, the formation of Ni−S species is influenced by reaction temperature, gas-phase composition, and reactor parameters. Furthermore, the Ni−S species formed may undergo phase transportation and may be oxidized during handling, which makes the identification of Ni−S species more difficult.20 It is therefore important to determine the formation and elimination of Ni−S species during the deactivation and regeneration of a Ni/SiO2 catalyst in biogas dry reforming. Because the chemisorption process is theoretically reversible and exothermal, surface Ni−S can be reduced by stopping H2S feeding or by temperature enhancement. Appari et al.5 applied H2S removal, temperature enhancement, and a vapor treatment method to regenerate deactivated Ni/γ-Al2O3 in a methane steam reforming process. Ashraf et al.14 studied three regeneration methods, and found that a temperature increase was more effective than removing sulfur from the feed gas or an oxidative treatment in Ni/Al2O3 in a biogas steam. Choudhary et al.23 conducted sulfur regeneration of a NiCoMgCeOx catalyst in an oxy−methane reforming process by air treatment, and reported that it was very effective. To the certainty of our knowledge, a comparison study on the reversibility of sulfur poisoning in a Ni/SiO2 catalyst in a biogas dry reforming process has not been undertaken. The effect of sulfur poisoning on a nickel catalyst in a typical biogas dry reforming process and the poisoning mechanism remain unknown; an effective regeneration method needs to be developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the deactivation and regeneration performance of a Ni/SiO2 catalyst under various operating conditions and different regeneration methods during a biogas dry reforming process. Catalytic activity and selectivity under different temperatures and H2S concentrations were tested, and three regeneration methods (stopping H2S feeding, temperature-programmed calcination (TPC), and O2 activation) were applied to compare the effects on reversibility. Furthermore, physical adsorption, X-ray diffraction (XRD), Xray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) were conducted to characterize the sulfur poisoning and carbon deposition of freshly reduced, original deactivated, and regenerated catalysts by different regeneration methods to further determine the sulfur deactivation mechanism.

■

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

Preparation of Support and Catalyst. A SiO2 support was prepared by vapor-phase hydrolysis of SiCl4 at 150 °C, as previously described by the authors.24 A degas procedure in a vacuum oven at 70 °C for 4 h and a calcination process in a muffle furnace at 800 °C for 4 10249

XCH4 /% =

[CH4]in − [CH4]out × 100 [CH4]in

(6)

XCO2 /% =

[CO2 ]in − [CO2 ]out × 100 [CO2 ]in

(7)


Research Article

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering [H 2]out H2 ratio = CO [CO]out

(8)

where [CH4], [CO2], [H2], and [CO] refer to the molar flow rates of the gas species, mol min−1. Catalyst Characterization. Catalysts that were freshly reduced, originally deactivated, and regenerated by the different regeneration methods were characterized by physical adsorption, XRD, TGA, and XPS methods. Physical adsorption was carried out by a surface area and porosity analyzer (ASAP2020 HD88, Micromeritics, GA, USA) to obtain the specific surface area (SSA), pore volume, and pore size of different samples. The SSA was calculated by the Brunauer−Emmett− Teller (BET) model, and the average pore diameter was calculated by the Barrett−Joyner−Halenda (BJH) model. XRD patterns were obtained through high-resolution XRD (D8 Advance, Siemens, Munich, Germany) using Cu Kα radiation (λ = 0.154 nm) with a scanning rate of 2 deg min−1 and 2θ range of 10−90°. A thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA/DSC 2, Mettler Toledo, Columbus, OH, USA) was applied to detect carbon deposition. Samples (∼15 mg) were placed in an alumina crucible of 150 μL and then treated from RT to 900 °C at a temperature ramp of 10 °C min−1 under an air stream of 60 mL min−1 with a protective argon gas stream of 20 mL min−1. XPS measurements were conducted using an ESCALAB 250XI instrument (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) with monochromatized Al Kα X-rays (1486.6 eV). The binding energies were corrected using the C 1s peak observed at 284.8 eV.

■

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Catalytic Activity under Different H2S Concentrations. Catalytic activity was observed under the different H2S concentrations. Figure 1 shows the effect of H2S concentration on biogas dry reforming at 700 °C. The conversion profiles can be divided into three regimes: before H2S introduction, with H2S exposure, and after stopping H2S feeding. In the first 30 min, biogas reformed in the absence of H2S, and it was clear that both CH4 and CO2 conversion decreased slightly at 700 °C, even when no H 2 S impurities were present; CH 4 conversion dropped from 53.4% to 50.5%, and CO2 conversion dropped from 63.8% to 61.5%. When H2S was introduced at a concentration of 100 ppm, the conversion of CH4 and CO2 decreased rapidly, dropping to ∼2.5% after 140 min. The use of a lower H2S concentration of 50 ppm also caused an obvious decrease in CH4 and CO 2 conversion; however, the deactivation rate was slower than at the higher H2S concentration. By 200 min after the H2S was introduced, CH4 conversion dropped to 7.9% and CO2 conversion fell to 8.5%. The deactivation rates of conversions were calculated by the conversion drop over time on H2S stream, and results were listed in Table S2. The deactivation rate of CH4 conversion was 22.9% with 50 ppm H2S and increased to 36% when H2S content was 100 ppm, indicating that a higher H2 S concentration will lead to a faster sulfur deactivation. This situation also went well with CO2 conversion. Conversion profiles were also recorded after H2S feeding was stopped. At the very moment that H2S feeding was stopped, both CH4 and CO2 conversion were revived slightly, but they then resumed the decline. During the tests with the two different H2S concentrations, CH4 conversion was always lower than CO2 conversion at 700 °C, which can be explained by the RWGS side reaction, which consumed more CO2 and H2 to produce CO and water vapor, resulting in a H2/CO ratio lower than 1.25 Figure 1b shows the related variation in the H2/CO ratio. Before the introduction of H2S, the H2/CO ratio was ∼0.8, but the value dropped with the introduction of H2S, displaying a trend similar to that of the CH4 and CO2

Figure 1. Influence of the H2S concentration on biogas dry reforming at 700 °C: (a) CH4 and CO2 conversion and (b) H2/CO ratio. Gas hourly space velocity (GHSV) = 24,000 mL g−1 h−1; P = 1 atm.

conversion profiles and indicating that H2S in the biogas inhibited the production of H2 more than that of CO. A similar conclusion has also been reported for H2 selectivity, which was observed to decrease to a greater degree than that of CO during a deactivation process.26 When the biogas dry reforming temperature was increased to 750 °C, the influence of the H2S content on CH4 and CO2 conversion and the H2/CO ratio are shown in Figure 2. The conversion and selectivity profiles were divided into the three same regimes. There was a notable difference, with the conversion of CH4 and CO2 remaining stable before the introduction of H2S, and the difference between CH4 and CO2 conversion being small at 83% for CH4 conversion and 85% for CO2 conversion. The related H2/CO ratio was ∼0.92, which was much closer to 1 than the value at 700 °C. A higher temperature can achieve a higher conversion of reactants and help retain the catalytic stability.27 After exposure to a H2S impurity of 100 pm, CH4 conversion dropped to 5.5%, and CO2 conversion fell to 7.9% in 180 min, whereas at a H2S concentration of 50 ppm, CH4 conversion fell to 6.5% and CO2 conversion fell to 7.5% in 200 min. When H2S feeding was stopped, the conversions continued to drop slowly. This was the same trend as that for the H2/CO ratio. Figure 3 shows the influence of the H2S concentration on biogas dry reforming at 800 °C. It is clear that both CH4 and CO2 conversion increased as the temperature increased, with 10250


Research Article


Figure 2. Influence of the H2S concentration on biogas dry reforming at 750 °C: (a) CH4 and CO2 conversion and (b) H2/CO ratio. GHSV = 24,000 mL g−1 h−1; P = 1 atm.

Figure 3. Influence of H2S concentration on biogas dry reforming at 800 °C: (a) CH4 and CO2 conversion and (b) H2/CO ratio. GHSV = 24,000 mL g−1 h−1; P = 1 atm.

the conversion reaching ∼88% at 800 °C, and the H2/CO ratio was 0.94 before H2S exposure. When the H2S concentration was 100 ppm, CH4 conversion and CO2 conversion fell to 5.1% and 7.9% in 130 min, respectively. It took 150 min for the conversions to drop to a similar level when the H2S concentration was 50 ppm. After stopping H2S feeding, both the CH4 and CO2 conversions were slowly revived. After 200 min, the conversions were still below 20%. The H2/CO ratio followed the same trend as that of the CH4 and CO2 conversions. From the results of the tests with H2S, it was apparent that, before H2S feeding, the catalytic activity of dry reforming was stable at high temperatures (750 and 800 °C); at 700 °C, there was a slight deactivation even in the absence of H2S feeding. After the introduction of H2S, catalysts displayed obvious deactivation at all of the temperatures investigated, and higher H2S concentration led to faster deactivation, which was considered reasonable because a higher H2S/H2 ratio has been shown to benefit the chemisorption of H2S on active metal and the formation of Ni−S species.20 This shows that the deactivation of H2S poisoning is not reversible simply by stopping the H2S feeding. The activity continued to drop at 700 and 750 °C; a high temperature of 800 °C led to a slight recovery in catalytic activity, but the original activity could not be attained. Although in theory, it is possible to regenerate the deactivated catalyst by stopping H2S feeding (i.e., by reversing the chemisorption of H2S on Ni), the relatively low driving

force and diffusion limit in real experiments leads to a low degree of regeneration of deactivated catalysts.14 Both reaction temperature and H2S concentration can influence the degree of catalyst recovery, and full regeneration could not be achieved in these tests, which agrees with previous findings.5,14 Regeneration of Catalysts. Because a higher temperature is favorable for catalyst recovery, a TPC method to 800 °C was also applied to compare the reversibility of the regeneration method. Figure 4 shows the conversion and selectivity results of deactivated catalysts regenerated by the TPC method. After calcination, the deactivated catalysts showed some recovery of activity, and then the conversions declined during the initial 30 min and remained stable at a lower level. The H2/CO ratio had a trend similar to that of the conversions. Table 1 shows the detailed changes in conversions. Compared to the original activity without the introduction of H2S at 800 °C, the CH4 conversion initially recovered to 66%, and then it slowly dropped to 44%, followed by a period of stability. The CO2 conversion initially recovered to 75%, and then it slowly dropped to 60%, followed by a period of stability. This phenomenon was similar to the situation at 700 and 750 °C, where the conversion of both CH4 and CO2 was revived slightly at first and then fell to a lower level, where it remained stable. It seems that, after regeneration by the TPC method, the activity could be partly revived, but there was still an obvious deactivation process, indicating that the absorbed sulfur was not fully removed by calcination. 10251


Research Article


Figure 4. Conversions and selectivity of deactivated catalysts regenerated by temperature-programmed calcination (TPC): (a) CH4 and CO2 conversion and (b) H2/CO ratio.

Figure 5. Conversions and selectivity of deactivated catalysts regenerated by O2 activation: (a) CH4 and CO2 conversion and (b) H2/CO ratio.

Figure 5 shows the conversions and H2/CO ratios of deactivated catalysts regenerated by the O2 activation method. Both the CH4 and CO2 conversions and the H2/CO ratio were stable after O2 activation at all the temperatures tested. At a high temperature of 800 °C, the activities revived to the original level, i.e., ∼88% conversion of CH4 and CO2 and a H2/CO ratio of 0.94. When the temperature was 750 °C, the conversion of CH4 and CO2 was 68% and 76%, respectively, which is a little lower than the original conversion at the same temperature. For the results at 700 °C, the conversion of CH4 and CO2 was 49% and 59%, respectively, also slightly lower than the fresh catalysts. The exact conversion data obtained from the O2 activation method, as well as the conversions of fresh and regenerated catalysts achieved by stopping H2S feeding, are listed in Table 1 for comparison. After O2

activation, the deactivated catalyst displayed stable activity, which was recovered to exactly the level of fresh catalysts at a high temperature of 800 °C. Previously, Blanchard et al.28 concluded similarly that catalyst activity can be completely recovered by calcining in air at 900 °C. Analysis of the Mechanism of H2S Poisoning and Regeneration. The characterizations of catalyst support, freshly reduced catalyst, original deactivated catalyst, and regenerated catalysts by different methods were conducted to analyze the mechanism of H2S poisoning and regeneration. Table 2 shows the SSAs, pore volumes, and average pore sizes of different samples. After wet-impregnation and reduction process, the SSA and pore volume was reduced by 42.0% and 34.3%, respectively, and the average pore size decreased slightly by 2.5%; this was caused by pore blocking during the wet-

Table 1. Summary of the Conversion of Fresh Catalysts and Regenerated Catalysts under Different Temperatures original

stopping H2S feeding

TPC

O2 activation

temp (°C)

XCH4

XCO2

XCH4

XCO2

XCH4

XCO2

XCH4

XCO2

700 750 800

52 82 88

63 84 88

drop to ∼0 drop to ∼0 rise to 9

drop to ∼0 drop to ∼0 rise to 16

37→9 47→17 66→44

51→20 65→29 75→60

49 68 88

59 76 88

10252


Research Article


patterns of freshly reduced, originally deactivated, and regenerated catalysts by stopping H2S feeding, TPC, and O2 activation. All of the catalysts had diffraction peaks of Ni° (PDF 04-0850), while the peak intensity of the original deactivation for Ni° was weak. The broad peak at ∼22° in all samples was attributed to the diffraction of the amorphous SiO2 support.24 It is also important to note that only the original deactivated catalyst had a new crystal phase of Ni7S6 (PDF 14-0364),35 which was caused by the reaction of H2S in biogas with the active nickel of the catalysts to form Ni−S. The existence of Ni7S6 species in the original deactivated catalyst is further proof that the sulfur poisoning mechanism (i.e., the formation of Ni− S blocks the active sites) leads to severe deactivation of catalysts. The Ni7S6 species has been detected in the sulfur poisoning process for the first time. The crystal sizes of nickel were calculated using Scherrer’s equation, and the results are listed in Table 2. The freshly reduced catalyst had an average Ni° crystal size of 5.64 nm, whereas the size of the crystal deactivated by H2S poisoning was 9.54 nm, indicating obvious sintering. Although the peak intensity of Ni7S6 is small, we can use it to calculate the crystal size of the Ni7S6 phase through the Scherrer equation. The diameter result was calculated to be ∼42 nm, which is much bigger than the 9.5 nm of Ni. The formation of Ni7S6 in large particle size may change the surface energy of the nickel particle and lead to catalyst sintering. After various regeneration methods, the average nickel crystal size changed to differing degrees. The diameter of the Ni° crystal size decreased in the order of original deactivation > stopping H2S feeding > TPC > O2 activation > freshly reduced catalyst, indicating that sulfur poisoning may also enhance catalyst sintering and that O2 activation is the most effective regeneration method for retarding catalyst sintering. This is in accordance with the conclusion of Yuan et al., who reported that the adsorption of sulfur might block the active sites and accelerate sintering as well.36 XPS analysis was used to determine the surface composition and chemical state of the nickel and sulfur species of the deactivated and regenerated catalysts. Figure 7 shows the Ni 2p 3/2 and S 2p XPS spectra of the original deactivated catalyst and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods. The strong peaks at 852.6 eV of Ni 2p in three regenerated catalysts indicate the existence of Ni°,37 whereas the peaks at 856.1 eV and ∼861.5 eV refer to the main and satellite peaks of Ni2O3,36 indicating that slight oxidation occurred during the biogas dry reforming process. The Ni° peak of the original deactivated catalyst shifted to a higher value (853.4 eV) than the regenerated catalyst, probably due to a different chemical environment of Ni° caused by the existence of Ni7S6. When the original deactivated catalyst was regenerated by different methods, the peak area of Ni° at 852.6 eV increased in the order of the original deactivation < stopping H2S feeding < TPC < O2 activation, and the peak of Ni2O3 at 856.1 eV decreased in the same order, which implied that sulfur poisoning had an oxidative effect on the nickel catalyst36 and the oxidative composition of nickel decreased to a different extent after regeneration by different methods. The S 2p spectrum in Figure 7b exhibited an obvious noise signal, as the formation of bulk Ni−S was unstable;17 however, a broad peak at 160.5−163.0 eV was still noticeable in the original deactivated catalysts, which could be attributed to a S2− species according to Struis et al.38 The results also confirmed the

Table 2. Textural Properties of Different Catalysts no.

sample

SSA (m2 g−1)

1 2 3 4 5 6

support reduced original deactivation stop H2S feeding TPC O2 activation

337.0 195.7 180.9 98.5 117.3 147.5

PV (cm3 g−1)

BJH av pore size (nm)

av cryst sizea (nm)

1.28 0.84 0.89 0.72 0.78 0.82

15.20 14.82 12.00 29.25 18.09 13.21

5.64 9.54 7.54 6.53 6.09

a

Average crystal size was obtained through Scherrer’s equation from the diffraction of the Ni(200) plane.

impregnation process29−31 and the thermal contraction and/or condensation by dehydration and dehydroxylation of catalyst support during the high-temperature reduction process.32,33 After catalyst was deactivated under H2S tolerance for about 150 min, the SSA of original deactivated catalyst was 180.9 m2 g−1, there was no obvious change in pore volume and average pore size compared with freshly reduced catalyst. After regeneration through different methods, all the regenerated catalysts have a decrease in SSA and pore volume and an increase in average pore size. However, the loss in SSA and pore volume for catalyst regenerated by stopping H2S feeding was most obvious. While catalysts regenerated by TPC and O2 activation have less decrease in SSA and pore volume. The degree of SSA and pore volume loss by different regenerated catalysts decreased by stop H2S feeding > TPC > O2 activation. Considering that catalyst poisoned by H2S was related to the chemical sorption with active metal species, and changes in SSA and pore volume were caused by the change of the textural structure of the catalyst support,5,34 so the reaction time of regenerated catalysts played an important role in affecting the SSA and pore volume of the catalysts. The reaction time of catalyst regenerated by stopping H2S feeding, which was 200 min, was responsible for the most obvious loss in SSA and pore volume. When the reaction time of catalyst regenerated by TPC and O2 activation was the same, the SSA of catalyst regenerated by O2 activation was higher, indicating that O2 activation was more effective. XRD analysis was used to characterize the change in the crystal phase in different catalysts. Figure 6 shows the XRD

Figure 6. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of fresh, deactivated, and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods. 10253


Research Article


Figure 7. XPS spectra of original deactivated catalysts and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods: (a) Ni 2p and (b) S 2p.

adsorbed gas and surface water. From 200 to 400 °C, the three regenerated catalysts exhibited an obvious weight increase of ∼2%, which was due to the oxidation of Ni° to NiO.39,40 When the temperature increased above 400 °C, the three regenerated catalysts started to lose weight in the air stream, which was ascribed to the oxidation of deposited carbon.41 The carbon deposition rate is calculated by the amount of carbon deposited over time on stream, and the results were listed in Table 3. The regenerated catalysts experienced a slight carbon deposition amount of ∼1%. The original deactivated catalyst had a TGA profile that was distinguishable from the three regenerated ones above 200 °C. The weight increase process occurred from 200 to ∼530 °C, with the increase being 2.73%, which was much larger than that of the regenerated catalysts. Because the same catalyst was applied here, the difference in weight increase was attributed to the oxidation of Ni−S, which was shown to exist by XRD and XPS analyses. During O2 activation by an air stream, Ni−S can be oxidized to nickel sulfate and decomposed to nickel oxide under an air stream42,43 (eqs 9 and 10). A reduction process was then applied to reduce NiO to metal Ni, thus reviving the catalytic activity.43,44 Ashrafi et al. reported that H2S poisoning was not reversible by air treatment,14 probably because of the absence of a reduction process after air treatment.

formation of Ni−S in the original deactivated catalyst, which agreed with the XRD results. The Ni−S species were only detected in the original deactivated catalysts, implying that the regeneration methods also helped to eliminate Ni−S, at least to a level making it undetectable by XRD and XPS. Figure 8 shows the TGA profiles of the original deactivated and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods.

Figure 8. Thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) profiles of the original deactivated catalysts and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods (60 mL min−1 air stream).

Ni−S + O2 → NiSO4

(9)

NiSO4 → NiO + SO2

(10)

Assuming that the four samples would have the same weight increase due to nickel oxidation, the actual amount of carbon deposited on the original deactivation catalyst would be the weight loss at 530 °C minus the difference during the weight

At temperatures below 200 °C, all four samples experienced a slight weight loss of ∼0.5%, which was attributed to the loss of

Table 3. Calculation of Carbon Deposition Amount of Catalyst Regenerated by Different Methods catalyst

freshly reduced

original deactivation

stopping H2S feeding

TPC

O2 activation

av cryst size (nm) wt increase (%) wt loss (%) carbon deposition amount (%) carbon deposition rate (mmol h−1)

5.64

9.54 2.73 3.97 3.28 0.86

7.54 2.10 1.10 1.10 0.29

6.53 1.95 0.94 0.94 0.25

6.09 2.08 0.86 0.86 0.22

10254


Research Article


regeneration on nickel catalyst is the formation and removal of Ni7S6, and O2 activation method is the most effective for reviving catalytic activity, preventing sintering, and reducing carbon deposition.

increase process of nickel and nickel sulfide oxidation. The carbon deposition rate on the original deactivated catalyst was calculated to be 0.86 mmol h−1, which was much more than that on the regenerated catalyst. The amount of carbon formed followed the order of the original deactivation > stopping H2S feeding > TPC > O2 activation, implying that sulfur poisoning blocked the active metal and inhibited carbon gasification.45,46 However, if sulfur concentration was precisely controlled, the existence of trace sulfur can inhibit carbon formation due to the ensemble of Ni atoms where carbon growth is not active, although the reaction rate would decrease.47 Since the catalytic activity was related to the number of active nickel sites, with the increase of time on stream (TOS), the number of active nickel sites will decrease, and the coverage of nickel sulfide (Ni−S/Nitotal) was lower than 1. For the original deactivated catalyst, the CH4 and CO2 conversions almost dropped to 0, which means the total loss of active nickel sites. However, the XRD and XPS results proved that metal Ni° dominates in the original deactivated catalyst. One probable explanation is that the residual active Ni was blocked by deposited carbon. Usually, carbon deposition is prohibited at high conversions since the main dry reforming reaction dominated this process, while when conversions are low, side reactions to form coke are more favorable. Thus, conversion loss was be caused by a combined and sequential poisoning effect of sulfur and carbon deposition.2,48 All three of the regeneration methods could effectively remove Ni−S and reduce carbon formation; however, the O2 activation method was the most effective for reviving catalytic activity, preventing sintering, and reducing carbon deposition.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02251. Scheme of the experimental setup, table of gas components of biogas with different H2S concentrations, and calculation of H2S deactivation rate under various conditions (PDF)

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*[email protected]. ORCID

Xuejing Chen: 0000-0002-6692-3727 Jianguo Jiang: 0000-0002-0074-040X Hui Zhou: 0000-0003-1410-4794 Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was financially supported by the Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment (Grant 2017ZX07202005), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 21576156), and Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program (Grant 2014z22075). The English in this document has been checked by at least two professional editors; both are native English speakers. For a certificate, please see http://www.textcheck. com/certificate/1H0Ldp.

■

CONCLUSIONS To better understand the deactivation and regeneration performance and mechanism of sulfur poisoning in a biogas dry reforming process, an evaluation of the deactivation and regeneration of a Ni/SiO2 catalyst under various operating conditions was conducted. Three regeneration methods, stopping H2S feeding, TPC, and O2 activation, were applied to compare their reversibility. The testing of catalytic activity and selectivity under different temperatures and H 2 S concentrations showed that H2S exposure in biogas feeding could cause severe catalyst deactivation, and a higher H2S concentration led to a faster deactivation. The deactivation of H2S poisoning was not reversible by simply stopping the H2S feeding. Only at a high temperature of 800 °C was a slight catalytic activity recovery evident, but the original activity could not be attained due to the diffusion limit. After being regenerated by the TPC method, the activity could be partly revived, but there was still obvious deactivation due to the incomplete removal of Ni−S. Oxygen activation stabilized catalytic activity at a certain level and was the most effective way to regenerate the deactivated catalyst. Furthermore, XRD, XPS, and TGA were applied to characterize the mechanism of sulfur poisoning and carbon deposition in freshly reduced, originally deactivated, and regenerated catalysts using different regeneration methods. The formation of Ni7S6 was detected for the first time through XRD in a sulfur poisoning process. The XPS spectrum also revealed the existence of Ni−S species, which blocked the active sites and led to catalyst sintering and carbon deposition. The reversibility of different regeneration methods was dependent on the degree of elimination of Ni−S. This work provides that the key factor for sulfur deactivation and

■

REFERENCES

(1) Saha, B.; Khan, A.; Ibrahim, H.; Idem, R. Evaluating the performance of non-precious metal based catalysts for sulfur-tolerance during the dry reforming of biogas. Fuel 2014, 120, 202−217. (2) Mancino, G.; Cimino, S.; Lisi, L. Sulphur poisoning of alumina supported Rh catalyst during dry reforming of methane. Catal. Today 2016, 277, 126−132. (3) Pakhare, D.; Spivey, J. A review of dry (CO2) reforming of methane over noble metal catalysts. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43 (22), 7813−37. (4) Baltrusaitis, J.; Luyben, W. L. Methane Conversion to Syngas for Gas-to-Liquids (GTL): Is Sustainable CO2 Reuse via Dry Methane Reforming (DMR) Cost Competitive with SMR and ATR Processes? ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3 (9), 2100−2111. (5) Appari, S.; Janardhanan, V. M.; Bauri, R.; Jayanti, S. Deactivation and regeneration of Ni catalyst during steam reforming of model biogas: An experimental investigation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39 (1), 297−304. (6) Ocsachoque, M. A.; Eugenio Russman, J. I.; Irigoyen, B.; Gazzoli, D.; Gonzalez, M. G. Experimental and theoretical study about sulfur deactivation of Ni/CeO2 and Rh/CeO2 catalysts. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2016, 172, 69−76. (7) da Silva, A. L.; Heck, N. C. Thermodynamics of sulfur poisoning in solid oxide fuel cells revisited: The effect of H2S concentration, temperature, current density and fuel utilization. J. Power Sources 2015, 296, 92−101. (8) Guo, J.; Xie, C.; Lee, K.; Guo, N.; Miller, J. T.; Janik, M. J.; Song, C. Improving the Carbon Resistance of Ni-Based Steam Reforming 10255


Research Article

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering Catalyst by Alloying with Rh: A Computational Study Coupled with Reforming Experiments and EXAFS Characterization. ACS Catal. 2011, 1 (6), 574−582. (9) Evans, S. E.; Staniforth, J. Z.; Darton, R. J.; Ormerod, R. M. A nickel doped perovskite catalyst for reforming methane rich biogas with minimal carbon deposition. Green Chem. 2014, 16 (10), 4587− 4594. (10) Estephane, J.; Aouad, S.; Hany, S.; El Khoury, B.; Gennequin, C.; El Zakhem, H.; El Nakat, J.; Aboukaïs, A.; Abi Aad, E. CO2 reforming of methane over Ni−Co/ZSM5 catalysts. Aging and carbon deposition study. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40 (30), 9201−9208. (11) Zhang, P.; Tong, J.; Huang, K. Combining Electrochemical CO2 Capture with Catalytic Dry Methane Reforming in a Single Reactor for Low-Cost Syngas Production. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016, 4 (12), 7056−7065. (12) Hepola, J.; Simell, P. Sulphur poisoning of nickel-based hot gas cleaning catalysts in synthetic gasification gas: I. Effect of different process parameters. Appl. Catal., B 1997, 14 (3−4), 287−303. (13) Moud, P. H.; Andersson, K. J.; Lanza, R.; Engvall, K. Equilibrium potassium coverage and its effect on a Ni tar reforming catalyst in alkali- and sulfur-laden biomass gasification gases. Appl. Catal., B 2016, 190, 137−146. (14) Ashrafi, M.; Pfeifer, C.; Pröll, T.; Hofbauer, H. Experimental Study of Model Biogas Catalytic Steam Reforming: 2. Impact of Sulfur on the Deactivation and Regeneration of Ni-Based Catalysts. Energy Fuels 2008, 22 (6), 4190−4195. (15) Rostrup-Nielsen, J. R. Sulfur-passivated nickel catalysts for carbon-free steam reforming of methane. J. Catal. 1984, 85 (1), 31− 43. (16) Garbarino, G.; Lagazzo, A.; Riani, P.; Busca, G. Steam reforming of ethanol−phenol mixture on Ni/Al2O3: Effect of Ni loading and sulphur deactivation. Appl. Catal., B 2013, 129, 460−472. (17) Chen, Y.; Xie, C.; Li, Y.; Song, C.; Bolin, T. B. Sulfur poisoning mechanism of steam reforming catalysts: an X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES) spectroscopic study. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12 (21), 5707−5711. (18) Riegraf, M.; Yurkiv, V.; Schiller, G.; Costa, R.; Latz, A.; Friedrich, K. A. The Influence of Sulfur Formation on Performance and Reforming Chemistry of SOFC Anodes Operating on Methane Containing Fuel. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2015, 162 (12), F1324−F1332. (19) Sadooghi, P.; Rauch, R. Mathematical modeling of sulfur deactivation effects on steam reforming of producer gas produced by biomass gasification. Fuel Process. Technol. 2013, 110, 46−52. (20) Bøgild Hansen, J.; Rostrup-Nielsen, J. Sulfur poisoning on Ni catalyst and anodes. Handbook of Fuel Cells; John Wiley & Sons: 2010; Chapter 65,10.1002/9780470974001.f500064. (21) Appari, S.; Janardhanan, V. M.; Bauri, R.; Jayanti, S.; Deutschmann, O. A detailed kinetic model for biogas steam reforming on Ni and catalyst deactivation due to sulfur poisoning. Appl. Catal., A 2014, 471, 118−125. (22) Niakolas, D. K. Sulfur poisoning of Ni-based anodes for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells in H/C-based fuels. Appl. Catal., A 2014, 486, 123− 142. (23) Choudhary, V. R.; Mondal, K. C.; Choudhary, T. V. Oxymethane reforming over high temperature stable NiCoMgCeOx and NiCoMgOx supported on zirconia−haffnia catalysts: Accelerated sulfur deactivation and regeneration. Catal. Commun. 2007, 8 (3), 561−564. (24) Chen, X.; Jiang, J.; Yan, F.; Tian, S.; Li, K. A novel low temperature vapor phase hydrolysis method for the production of nano-structured silica materials using silicon tetrachloride. RSC Adv. 2014, 4 (17), 8703−8710. (25) Shinde, V. M.; Madras, G. Catalytic performance of highly dispersed Ni/TiO2 for dry and steam reforming of methane. RSC Adv. 2014, 4 (10), 4817. (26) Li, T. S.; Xu, M.; Gao, C.; Wang, B.; Liu, X.; Li, B.; Wang, W. G. Investigation into the effects of sulfur on syngas reforming inside a solid oxide fuel cell. J. Power Sources 2014, 258, 1−4.

(27) Pawar, V.; Ray, D.; Subrahmanyam, Ch.; Janardhanan, V. M. Study of Short-Term Catalyst Deactivation Due to Carbon Deposition during Biogas Dry Reforming on Supported Ni Catalyst. Energy Fuels 2015, 29 (12), 8047−8052. (28) Blanchard, J.; Achouri, I.; Abatzoglou, N. H2S poisoning of NiAl2O4 /Al2O3 -YSZ catalyst during methane dry reforming. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2016, 94 (4), 650−654. (29) Elsayed, N. H.; Roberts, N. R. M.; Joseph, B.; Kuhn, J. N. Low temperature dry reforming of methane over Pt−Ni−Mg/ceria− zirconia catalysts. Appl. Catal., B 2015, 179, 213−219. (30) Fan, M.-S.; Abdullah, A. Z.; Bhatia, S. Utilization of greenhouse gases through carbon dioxide reforming of methane over Ni−Co/ MgO−ZrO2: Preparation, characterization and activity studies. Appl. Catal., B 2010, 100 (1−2), 365−377. (31) Theofanidis, S. A.; Galvita, V. V.; Poelman, H.; Marin, G. B. Enhanced Carbon-Resistant Dry Reforming Fe-Ni Catalyst: Role of Fe. ACS Catal. 2015, 5 (5), 3028−3039. (32) Chen, S.-Y.; Tang, C.-Y.; Lee, J.-F.; Jang, L.-Y.; Tatsumi, T.; Cheng, S. Effect of calcination on the structure and catalytic activities of titanium incorporated SBA-15. J. Mater. Chem. 2011, 21 (7), 2255− 2265. (33) Jabbour, K.; El Hassan, N.; Davidson, A.; Casale, S.; Massiani, P. Factors affecting the long-term stability of mesoporous nickel-based catalysts in combined steam and dry reforming of methane. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2016, 6 (12), 4616−4631. (34) Rasmussen, F. B.; Sehested, J.; Teunissen, H. T.; Molenbroek, A. M.; Clausen, B. S. Sintering of Ni/Al2O3 catalysts studied by anomalous small angle X-ray scattering. Appl. Catal., A 2004, 267 (1− 2), 165−173. (35) Cao, F.; Liu, R.; Zhou, L.; Song, S.; Lei, Y.; Shi, W.; Zhao, F.; Zhang, H. One-pot synthesis of flowerlike Ni7S6 and its application in selective hydrogenation of chloronitrobenzene. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20 (6), 1078−1085. (36) Yuan, C.; Yao, N.; Wang, X.; Wang, J.; Lv, D.; Li, X. The SiO2 supported bimetallic Ni−Ru particles: A good sulfur-tolerant catalyst for methanation reaction. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 260, 1−10. (37) Wang, N.; Shen, K.; Huang, L.; Yu, X.; Qian, W.; Chu, W. Facile Route for Synthesizing Ordered Mesoporous Ni−Ce−Al Oxide Materials and Their Catalytic Performance for Methane Dry Reforming to Hydrogen and Syngas. ACS Catal. 2013, 3 (7), 1638− 1651. (38) Struis, R. P. W. J.; Schildhauer, T. J.; Czekaj, I.; Janousch, M.; Biollaz, S. M. A.; Ludwig, C. Sulphur poisoning of Ni catalysts in the SNG production from biomass: A TPO/XPS/XAS study. Appl. Catal., A 2009, 362 (1−2), 121−128. (39) Nair, M. M.; Kaliaguine, S.; Kleitz, F. Nanocast LaNiO3 Perovskites as Precursors for the Preparation of Coke-Resistant Dry Reforming Catalysts. ACS Catal. 2014, 4 (11), 3837−3846. (40) Theofanidis, S. A.; Batchu, R.; Galvita, V. V.; Poelman, H.; Marin, G. B. Carbon gasification from Fe−Ni catalysts after methane dry reforming. Appl. Catal., B 2016, 185, 42−55. (41) Zhao, J.; Zhou, W.; Ma, J. Pretreatment as the crucial step for biogas reforming over Ni−Co bimetallic catalyst − A mechanistic study of CO2 pretreatment. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39 (25), 13429−13436. (42) Galea, N. M.; Lo, J. M. H.; Ziegler, T. A DFT study on the removal of adsorbed sulfur from a nickel(111) surface: Reducing anode poisoning. J. Catal. 2009, 263 (2), 380−389. (43) Yung, M. M.; Cheah, S.; Magrini-Bair, K.; Kuhn, J. N. Transformation of Sulfur Species during Steam/Air Regeneration on a Ni Biomass Conditioning Catalyst. ACS Catal. 2012, 2 (7), 1363− 1367. (44) Li, L.; Howard, C.; King, D. L.; Gerber, M.; Dagle, R.; Stevens, D. Regeneration of Sulfur Deactivated Ni-Based Biomass Syngas Cleaning Catalysts. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2010, 49 (20), 10144−10148. (45) Zheng, Q.; Janke, C.; Farrauto, R. Steam reforming of sulfurcontaining dodecane on a Rh−Pt catalyst: Influence of process parameters on catalyst stability and coke structure. Appl. Catal., B 2014, 160−161, 525−533. 10256


Research Article

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering (46) Jung, S. Y.; Ju, D. G.; Lim, E. J.; Lee, S. C.; Hwang, B. W.; Kim, J. C. Study of sulfur-resistant Ni−Al-based catalysts for autothermal reforming of dodecane. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40 (39), 13412− 13422. (47) Trimm, D. L. Coke formation and minimisation during steam reforming reactions. Catal. Today 1997, 37, 233−238. (48) Xie, C.; Chen, Y.; Li, Y.; Wang, X.; Song, C. Influence of sulfur on the carbon deposition in steam reforming of liquid hydrocarbons over CeO2−Al2O3 supported Ni and Rh catalysts. Appl. Catal., A 2011, 394 (1−2), 32−40.

10257
