Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
i
use of mesoporous catalyst have been found over a Cu/MCM-41
catalyst, shown in Paper V. Also in Paper V, the effect of metal
promoters (Fe and K) has been studied; a noticeable increase of
ethanol reaction rate was found over Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 catalyst as
compared to Cu/MCM-41.
ii
Sammanfattning
Den termokemiska förgasningsprocessen konverterar nästan alla
typer av biomassa till en önskad slutprodukt, det vill säga
gasformiga eller flytande drivmedel och kemikalier. De drivmedel
som erhållits på detta sätt är förnyelsebara biobränslen, som är
alternativ till fossila bränslen. Under de senaste åren har
termokemiska anläggningar för produktion av bioetanol lanserats
och andra är under uppbyggnad. Totalt kan cirka 290 miljoner
liter etanol per år förväntas bli producerade via den termokemiska
processen, mestadels från fast kommunalt avfall. Stora
ansträngningar har gjorts för att hitta en selektiv katalysator för
den önskade produkten, d.v.s. etanol.
iii
har liknande slutsatser om användningen av mesoporösa
katalysatorer erhållits över en Cu/MCM-41-katalysator, vilket visas
i publikation V. I Publikationen V, har effekten av
metallpromotorerna (K och Fe) studerats, där de mest intressanta
resultaten från Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41-katalysator var den märkbara
ökningen av reaktionshastigheten till etanol i jämförelse med
Cu/MCM-41-katalysator.
iv
List of appended papers
The work presented in this doctoral thesis is based on the following
publications. The papers are appended at the end of the thesis and
referred to in the text using Roman numerals (I – V).
v
V. L. Lopez, V. Montes, H. Kušar, S. Cabrera, M. Boutonnet,
S. Järås
Syngas conversion to ethanol over a mesoporous
Cu/MCM-41 catalyst: effect of K and Fe promoters
Applied Catalysis A: General, 526 (2016) 77-83.
vi
Other publications and conference presentations
Peer-reviewed publications
vii
L. Quispe, M.C. Arteaga, E. Cárdenas, L. Lopez, C. Santelices,
E. Palenque, S. Cabrera.
Elimination of Cyanide by means of combined UV/ H2O2/TiO2
system
(Eliminación de Cianuro mediante sistema combinado
UV/H2O2/TiO2)
Bolivian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 28 no. 2 (2011) 113-118.
Book chapters
L. Lopez (author)
Ethanol and Higher Alcohols: state of the art
(Evaluación de la tecnología disponible para la producción de
etanol y alcoholes superiores)
Book chapter, Natural Gas Institute, Higher University of San
Andres, La Paz-Bolivia, (2016) 237-289.
viii
Conference contributions
L. Lopez, M. Boutonnet, S. Cabrera, S. Järås
Production of ethanol from synthesis gas
Oral presentation, Swedish Catalysis Society, Perstorp, Sweden,
2009.
ix
Poster Presentation, European Catalysis Congress IX, Glasgow,
Scotland, 2011.
L. Lopez, S. Cabrera
Conversion of Bolivian natural gas to national interest products
(Conversión de gas natural boliviano a productos de interés
Nacional)
Oral presentation, VII Bolivian Congress on Chemistry, La Paz,
Bolivia, 2012.
x
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.1 Setting the scene……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.2 Scope of the work.…………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
CHAPTER 2: Thermochemical processing of biomass: fuels for the
transportation sector………………………………………………………………………………. 3
2.1 Biomass pre-treatment and gasification…………………………………………………………. 5
2.2 Syngas cleaning and conditioning…………………………………………………………………… 8
2.3 Catalytic synthesis of fuels……………………………………………………………………………… 9
2.3.1 Synthetic Natural Gas……………………………………………………………………………….. 11
2.3.2 Gasoline and Diesel…………………………………………………………………………………… 11
2.3.3 Di-Methyl Ether………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
2.3.4 Ethanol and Higher Alcohols…………………………………………………………………….. 13
CHAPTER 3: Ethanol and Higher Alcohols Synthesis…………………………………. 15
3.1 Alcohols as motor fuels………………………………………………………………………………….. 15
3.2 Industrial process development……………………………………………………………………… 16
3.2.1 Process configurations for direct synthesis of alcohols……………………………… 16
3.2.2 Process configurations for multi-step synthesis of ethanol……………………….. 18
3.2.3 Current projects for the thermochemical production of ethanol………………. 19
3.2.4 Preliminary considerations for ethanol production from biomass: the case
of Bolivia……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 21
CHAPTER 4: Catalytic conversion of synthesis gas to ethanol and higher
alcohols…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23
4.1 Thermodynamic considerations……………………………………………………………………… 23
4.2 Types of catalysts…………………………………………………………………………………………… 24
4.2.1 Rh-based catalysts……………………………………………………………………………………. 25
4.2.2 Cu-based catalysts……………………………………………………………………………………. 25
4.2.3 Role of the catalyst’s support……………………………………………………………………. 25
4.2.3.1 Ordered Mesoporous Silica (MCM-41): the “atrane route”………………….. 26
4.3 Reaction mechanisms…………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
CHAPTER 5: Experimental methods…………………………………………………………. 33
5.1 Catalyst preparation………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
5.1.1 Mesoporous Silica MCM-41……………………………………………………………………... 33
5.1.2 Metal impregnation…………………………………………………………………………………. 34
5.2 Catalyst characterization……………………………………………………………………………….. 34
5.2.1 N2-Physisorption………………………………………………………………………………………. 34
5.2.2 X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)…………………………………………………………………………….. 35
5.2.3 H2-Chemisorption…………………………………………………………………………………….. 35
5.2.4 Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM)…………………………………………………. 35
xi
5.2.5 Temperature Programmed Reduction (TPR)……………………………………………… 35
5.2.6 X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS)………………………………………………….. 35
5.2.7 Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA)……………………………………………………………. 36
5.3 Catalytic testing……………………………………………………………………………………………… 36
5.3.1 Reactor set-up and procedures………………………………………………………………… 36
5.3.2 Product analysis and data treatment………………………………………………………… 38
CHAPTER 6: Catalytic performance of a typical Rh/SiO2 catalyst and a
mesoporous Rh/MCM-41 catalyst…………………………………………………………… 41
6.1 Product distribution and selectivity to C2-oxygenated compounds..………………. 41
6.1.1 Effect of syngas conversion………………………………………………………………………. 43
6.1.2 Effect of the catalyst reduction temperature……………………………………………. 44
6.1.3 Effect of hydrogen partial pressure………………………………………………………….. 44
6.1.4 Effect of water addition……………………………………………………………………………. 45
6.2 Catalyst characterization before and after catalytic testing……………………………. 47
6.2.1 Specific surface area and pore size distribution………………………………………… 47
0 3+
6.2.2 Surface composition: Rh and Rh ……………………………………………………………. 49
6.2.3 Porous ordering by XRD and TEM……………………………………………………………… 49
6.2.4 Metal support interactions……………………………………………………………………….. 51
6.3 Interpretation of the catalytic performance of Rh/MCM-41 compared to
Rh/SiO2…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 52
6.3.1 Water vapor concentration in mesoporous Rh/MCM-41 catalyst……………… 52
6.3.2 Higher ethanol selectivity as consequence of the water vapor
concentration in mesoporous Rh/MCM-41 catalyst…………………………………………… 54
CHAPTER 7: Effect of Fe and K promoters on Cu/MCM-41 catalyst..………… 57
7.1 Catalysts characterization: XRD,TGA, N2 physisorption, TEM, XPS and TPR..…… 57
7.2 Catalytic testing: product selectivity trends……………………………………………………. 60
7.2.1 Effect of K as promoter…………………………………………………………………………….. 62
7.2.2 Effect of Fe as promoter…………………………………………………………………………… 62
7.2.3 Effect of K and Fe addition……………………………………………………………………….. 62
7.3 Selectivities to alcohols and other oxygenated compounds……………………………. 63
7.4 Anderson–Schulz–Flory (ASF) distribution……………………………………………………… 64
CHAPTER 8: Conclusions………………………………………………………………………….. 67
8.1 Main results of this work………………………………………………………………………………… 67
8.2 Final remarks and future work……………………………………………………………………….. 69
Nomenclature…………………………………………………………………………………………. 71
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………. 73
References……………………………………………………………………………………………… 76
Appendices: Papers I-V
xii
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1
1.2 Scope of the work
The objective of the thesis was to study the influence of operating
conditions as well as catalyst properties and composition on the
catalytic performance during the catalytic conversion of syngas to
ethanol and higher alcohols. The latter, within the context of
generation of renewable fuels for the transportation sector,
especially the thermochemical process using biomass-derived
syngas. In particular the work was focused on; (I) The effect of
reaction conditions (temperature, pressure, space velocity and
syngas H2/CO ratio) and the catalyst activation procedure
(different reduction temperatures) on the conversion of syngas to
ethanol; (II) The catalytic performance and characterization of
novel mesoporous catalysts using a hexagonal mesoporous silica
(i.e. MCM-41) as catalyst support and Rh as the active metal for the
synthesis of ethanol; (III) The effect of Fe and K promoters on the
catalytic behavior of mesoporous Cu/MCM-41 catalyst for the
synthesis of ethanol and higher alcohols.
2
CHAPTER 2
3
4
Table 2.1. Chemical composition of various types of biomass and some solid fossil fuels. Adapted from Vassilev et al. [5],
Copyright (2010), with permission from Elsevier.
Ultimate analysis (wt.%)
Proximate analysis (wt.%)
(dry and ash-free basis)
SOURCE Range
Volatile Fixed
Moisture Ash C O H N S Cl
matter carbon
Minimum 30.4 6.5 4.7 0.1 48.7 32.0 5.4 0.1 0.01 0.01
WOOD AND WOODY
Mean 62.9 15.1 19.3 2.7 52.1 41.2 6.2 0.4 0.08 0.02
BIOMASS
Maximum 79.7 24.1 62.9 8.4 57.0 45.3 10.2 0.7 0.42 0.05
HERBACEOUS AND Minimum 41.5 9.1 4.4 0.8 42.2 34.2 3.2 0.1 0.01 0.01
AGRICULTURAL Mean 66.0 16.9 12.0 5.1 49.9 42.6 6.2 1.2 0.15 0.20
BIOMASS Maximum 76.6 35.3 47.9 18.6 58.4 58.4 9.2 3.4 0.6 0.83
Minimum 43.3 12.4 2.5 23.4 57.3 20.8 6.8 6.2 1.20 0.50
ANIMAL BIOMASS* Mean 52.5 12.8 5.9 28.8 58.9 23.1 7.4 9.2 1.45 0.69
Maximum 61.7 13.1 9.3 34.3 60.5 25.3 8.0 12.2 1.69 0.87
Minimum 40.9 0.5 2.5 3.2 45.4 16.4 6.0 0.2 0.01 0.04
CONTAMINATED
Mean 63.7 8.0 11.6 16.7 53.6 37.0 7.3 1.7 0.46 0.31
BIOMASS**
Maximum 79.0 14.5 38.1 43.3 70.9 46.1 11.2 6.1 2.33 0.83
OTHER TYPES OF BIOMASS
Wheat straw 67.2 16.3 10.1 6.4 49.4 43.6 6.1 0.7 0.17 0.61
Straw 64.3 13.8 12.4 9.5 48.8 44.5 5.6 1.0 0.13 0.54
Rice husks 56.1 17.2 10.6 16.1 49.3 43.7 6.1 0.8 0.08 0.12
Soya husks 69.6 19.0 6.3 5.1 45.4 46.9 6.7 0.9 0.10 -
Sugar cane bagasse 76.6 11.1 10.4 1.9 49.8 43.9 6.0 0.2 0.06 0.03
Marine macroalgae 45.1 23.1 10.7 21.1 43.2 45.8 6.2 2.2 2.60 3.34
SOLID FOSSIL FUELS
Peat 57.8 24.3 14.6 3.3 56.3 36.2 5.8 1.5 0.2 0.04
Lignite 32.8 25.7 10.5 31.0 64.0 23.7 5.5 1.0 5.8 0.01
Coal 30.8 43.9 5.5 19.8 78.2 13.6 5.2 1.3 1.7 0.03
* Based on chicken litter and meat-bone meal. ** Furniture waste, waste paper, sewage sludge and others.
One route for biomass manufacturing is the thermochemical
process [6]. This process can be divided in three sections; i)
pretreatment and gasification, ii) cleaning and conditioning and,
iii) catalytic synthesis and purification, as schematically shown in
Figure 2.1. Thus, a variety of synthetic fuels can be obtained from
biomass, either traditional fuels such as Gasoline, Diesel and
Natural Gas or alternative fuels such as Di-Methyl Ether (DME),
Ethanol and Higher Alcohols.
Renewable Feedstock
(Municipal solid wastes, forest and agricultural biomass, other).
5
transfer and gasification. This could be further enhanced
with porous particles. The smaller particles also favor the
yield to CO and H2, while the yield to CO2 is diminished.
− Drying, biomass with low moisture (<10 %) is desired for
the gasification process. Drying is an energy-consuming
process and for that reason several dryer configurations
have been used to dry biomass (e.g. bin dryer, band
conveyor dryer, rotary cascade dryer) [7].
( ) (2.1.)
6
product gas move downdraft and thus the exit temperature
is high (800 °C), so most of the tar is consumed. On the
other hand, fluidized gasifiers have better heat and mass
transfer which increases the reaction rates and conversion
efficiencies. Typically, silica or alumina is used as fluidizing
medium. Solid catalysts can also be used to increase
conversion efficiency and reduce tar formation. For that,
the catalyst must be stable at high temperatures and
resistant to poisoning.
- Biomass flow rate, type and properties. Overfeeding of
biomass can lead to plugging and reduce conversion
efficiency, while starve-feeding results in lower yield.
Moreover, the biomass type (Table 2.1) affects the product
composition.
- Air and steam flow rate. Air flow rate directly affects the
degree of combustion and the gasification temperature,
which in turn affect the biomass conversion and the
product composition. Supplying steam increases the partial
pressure of H2O and, thus water gas shift (WGS) and
methane steam reforming (MSR) reactions are favored. As
a consequence, the resulting syngas contains more
hydrogen.
- Gasification temperature profile. The gasification
temperature is one of the most important factors for
controlling the product composition and properties. At
temperatures of 750-800 °C, the WGS and MSR reactions
dominate favoring the H2 production. At 850-900 °C, the
MSR and Boudouard reactions dominate, resulting in
higher CO content and, as consequence, a decrease in tar
formation and an increase of gas yield are observed [5].
7
2.2 Syngas cleaning and conditioning
8
- Tar removal. Tar consists of compounds that are not
decomposed and remain in the product gas. They are mixed
oxygenates, phenolic ethers, alkyl phenolics, heterocyclic
ethers, short and large poly-aromatic hydrocarbons. Two
approaches are applied for tar removing [10]; i) optimizing
the gasification operation conditions together the use of
catalysts (so called in-bed catalysts) and ii) a secondary
reactor for tar destruction and achievement an acceptable
level in the product gas.
9
10
Table 2.2. Status on facilities for the conversion of biomass (via gasification) to transportation fuels [13].
Company/ Technology
Location Startup Status Raw material Fuel
Institution level
Alexandria LA Demonstration Under Gasoline-type products
Cool Planet 2016 Forest residues
(USA) - Commercial construction (30 000 t/y)
Swindom Demonstration Under Organic residues and Synthetic Natural gas
Go Green Fuels Ltd. 2018
(UK) - Commercial construction waste streams (1 500 t/y)
Gothenborg Demonstration Synthetic Natural gas
Goteborg Energi AB 2014 Operational Lignocellulosic crops
(Sweden) plant (11 200 t/y)
- DME (608 t/y)
Karlsruhe Institute of Karlsruhe Demonstration
2014 Operational Lignocellulosic crops - Gasoline-type fuels
Technology (Germany) plant
(360 t/y)
Consortium Groen Alkmaar, Demonstration Synthetic Natural gas
2018 Planned Lignocellulosic crops
Gas 2.0 (Netherlands) plant (6 500 t/y)
Gebze Fischer-Tropsch liquids
TUBITAK Pilot plant 2013 Operational Forest residues
(Turkey) (250 t/y)
GTI Gas Technology Des Plaines IL - Fischer-Tropsch liquids
Pilot plant 2012 Operational Lignocellulosic crops
Institute (USA) - Gasoline-type fuels
- Fischer-Tropsch liquids
Dunkirk
BioTfuel-consortium Pilot Plant 2012 Operational Lignocellulosic crops (60 t/y)
(France)
- Jet fuel
Oberhausen Diesel-type hydrocarbons
Greasoline GmbH Pilot plant 2011 Operational Oil crops, oils and fats
(Germany) (2 t/y)
2.3.1 Synthetic Natural Gas
(2.2.)
The effects on the methanation reaction of the low H2/C ratio and
the inherent impurities of the biomass-derived syngas are
currently under investigation. Especially, novel configurations for
biomass gasifiers such as i) absorption-enhanced gasification/
reforming, ii) internally circulating fluidized beds and others types
of reactors are being investigated, in order to generate a hydrogen-
rich syngas [11]. A commercial project (the GoBiGas project) in
Göteborg (Sweden) is being developed which aims at the
production of both methane equivalent to 20 MW and gas
equivalent to 80-100 MW. Also, it is expected that the gas
production will reach 1 TWh by 2020, which represents about 30
% of the gas consumption in Gothenburg city or the fuel needed for
100 000 cars [14].
11
performed using Co-based catalysts at low temperature (LTFT), i.e.
200-240 °C.
(2.3.)
(2.4.)
12
In 2014, a demonstration plant was installed in Germany by
academia and industry jointly. The plant uses lignocellulosic crops
as main raw material, which is processed via fast pyrolysis and
gasification to produce syngas. The final products are DME (608
tons/year) and gasoline-type fuels (360 tons/year). With the
results from the demonstration plant, the next step for
commercializing can be planned. However, so far no news has
been release about the DME production at commercial scale.
13
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.1. Basic properties of fuels (From Paper I). Adapted from [11] with
permission from The Royal Society of Chemistry.
Mixed
FT FT
SNG Methanol Ethanol alcohols DME
Gasoline Diesel
(Octamix)
Formula CH4 CH3OH C2H5OH C1-8OH CH3OCH3 C6-C12 C12-C20
15
The most commercialized alcohol used as fuel is ethanol. Vehicles
known as flexible fuel vehicles (FFV) can run either with pure
ethanol, pure gasoline or a mixture of both. For example, pure
ethanol vehicles are largely commercialized in Brazil. A mixture of
gasoline and ethanol (abbreviated as EX, where X indicate the
percentage of ethanol e.g. E85 has 85 % of ethanol) is
commercialized in the USA and Europe. Today, most vehicles are
able to run with at least 10 % ethanol (E10) blended into the
gasoline.
16
Admixing H2 rich gas
Alcohol-synthesis gas
Alcohol
Synthesis Reactor Stripper syngas SYNGAS
Crude
alcohol
SNG
Hydrogenation
Reactor
Methanator
Gas-Liquid
Separator
Hydrogenated
crude alcohol
Lower Alcohols
Destillation
Section
Higher Alcohols
Figure 3.1. Basic flow diagram for the synthesis of alcohols (C2–4OH) [20].
17
fresh syngas and recycled to the main reactor unit. The latter is
done in order to promote the carbon chain growth to higher
alcohols, via alcohol homologation or alcohols coupling. The main
reactor unit operates at 20 bar and 270-400 °C and uses a Cu-
ZnO/Al2O3 based catalyst. The hydrogenation reactor unit operates
at similar pressure but in a temperature range of 100-220 °C using
a typical noble metal-based catalyst (e.g. Pt and/or Pd) or a Cu–
ZnO/Al2O3-based catalyst.
18
Figure 3.2. Block diagram for the multistep synthesis of ethanol by Enerkem [21].
19
20
21
example, assuming 10 vt.% of ethanol blended with gasoline to be
sold in Bolivia this would require a production of about 102x10 3
ton/ year which does not take advantage of the economy of scale
[28]. Then, a larger percentage (>10 vt.%) of ethanol blended with
gasoline may be appropriate to justify ethanol production. On the
other hand, ethanol could be produced for the external market. In
the Latin American region most countries have a neutral balance
between production and consumption, with the exception of
Mexico which imports around 100 ktons/year of ethanol. Larger
markets such as the USA, Canada and Europe could be
investigated as potential markets.
22
CHAPTER 4
23
24
28
20 a) b)
24 CO
C5-8OH
16 CO 20
H2O 16 C5-8OH
12 CO2
12
8 H2O
8
H2 H2
4 4
C1-4OH C1-4OH
0 0
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 200 300 400 500 600 700
T ( C) T ( C)
18 c) 18 d)
15 15
CO
Mass rate (g/h)
Several catalysts have been proposed and tested for the synthesis
of ethanol and higher alcohols [11, 32, 33]. They can roughly be
classified as Rh-based, Cu-based, Co-based and Mo-based
catalysts. Among them, the Rh-based catalysts present the highest
selectivity to ethanol. The rest of the catalysts have similar
selectivity to ethanol, but higher activity (conversion of syngas per
catalyst volume). In the present work, the attention was focused on
the study of Rh and Cu based catalysts.
24
4.2.1. Rh-based catalysts
Previous work has shown that Cu-based catalysts are less selective
for ethanol formation, and can produce a mixture of alcohols at
high syngas conversion. In this case, ethanol could be extracted
from the produced alcohols. Metal promoters such as Fe, Co, Ni,
La, Mn or Pd are active for increasing the yield to alcohols [11]. For
example, a catalyst containing Cu-Pd-Fe-Co metals, has shown a
syngas conversion as high as 84 % and an alcohol selectivity of 37
% with the following alcohol distribution: 26 % methanol, 38 %
ethanol, 27 % propanol and 9 % butanol [38].
25
catalyst support can affect the product distribution by different
mechanisms, such as increasing the acidity (e.g. aluminas or
zeolites), basicity (e.g. MgO or TiO2) or generating strong metal-
support interactions. Thus, it is desirable to have an inert catalyst
with no effect on the active sites of a catalyst. Among the typical
catalyst supports, silica (SiO2) is one of the most inert supports and
is widely used in different catalytic processes. In our work, we have
chosen a typical SiO2 and a novel mesoporous silica (MCM-41,
described in the following section) as catalyst supports.
26
case of MCM-41, the surfactant (CTAB) packs together to form
cylindrical micelles.
Figure 4.2. MCM-41 formation via possible mechanistic pathways: (1) liquid
crystal phase initiated and (2) silicate anion initiated. Reprinted with permission
from Beck et al. [45], Copyright (1992) American Chemical Society.
27
been used in different catalytic reactions with interesting results
[41].
28
a)
b)
Figure 4.3. Schematic drawing of silica precursors for the synthesis of MCM-41:
a) silatrane like compound (R= organic substituent or water molecule) and, b)
tetraethyl orthosilicate (TEOS). In the right part in both a) and b), the surface total
charge density (calculated by the Chem3D software [48]) is shown.
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) (4.1)
29
2. Surfactant (e.g. CTAB) addition to the mixture of atrane
(e.g. silatrane) and TEA. TEA acts as a co-solvent which
enhances the solubility of the CTAB.
3. Hydrolysis and condensation by addition of water to the
mixture of silatrane + CTAB + TEA. Cabrera et al. [49]
have studied the stability of the atrane compounds in
aqueous media; in the case of the siliatrane, the main
specie has been characterized as [Si(TEA)2(H3O)H2]+.
4. Aging in order to favor condensation reactions and thus
consolidate the meso-structures at long range
(gelification).
5. Elimination of the surfactant and TEA by thermal
treatment (calcination), leaving a solid mesoporous
structure (e.g. MCM-41).
30
+ H*
CH4
CH3*+O* + CO* + 3H*
dissociation CH3CO* CH3CH2OH
insertion
+ H*
CH3OH
non-dissociation
Figure 4.4. Schematic mechanism for ethanol synthesis and main byproducts
formation (methanol and methane) over Rh-based catalysts, elaborated from
references [33, 50, 51].
( ) (4.2)
( )
( ) ( ) (4.3)
31
CHAPTER 5
Experimental methods
Tetraethyl orthosilicate
(TEOS) Triethanolamine
(TEA)
- NaOH
- 130 ºC
SILATRANE
- 60 ºC
- Surfactant CTAB
- H2O
- Aging
(48h at 20ºC)
- Washing/filtration
- Calcination
(6h at 550ºC)
MCM-41
Figure 5.1. Main steps for the preparation of MCM-41 via the “Atrane Route”.
Elaborated from references [49, 55, 56].
33
A commercial hexagonal MCM-41 was purchased from Sigma
Aldrich which was indistinctly used with the MCM-41 obtained
from the “Atrane Route”.
Cu-promoters/MCM-41 catalysts
Copper (from the precursor Cu(NO3)2·3H2O ) was incorporated
into MCM-41 by aqueous wetness impregnation using an excess of
water under constant stirring for 3 h. After impregnation, the solid
was dried at 120 °C for 3 h and then calcined at 500 °C for5 h to
obtain the Cu/MCM-41 catalyst. Then, potassium (from the
precursor K2CO3) was added to the Cu/MCM-41 catalyst following
the same procedure as for Cu addition and using the same thermal
treatment as described above. Iron (from the precursor
Fe(NO3)3·9H2O) was added to the Cu-K/MCM-41 catalyst also
following the same procedure as for the Cu addition.
34
5.2.2. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD)
Powder X-ray diffraction was performed using a Siemens D5000
instrument with Cu K-alpha radiation (2θ = 10°–90°, step size =
0.04°) equipped with a Ni filter and operated at 40 kV and 30 mA.
5.2.3. H2-Chemisorption
H2-chemisorption was carried out on a Micromeritics ASAP 2020
instrument. Prior to the analysis, the catalyst sample was reduced
with hydrogen. Repeated analyses were made in order to
discriminate between the amounts of hydrogen adsorbed via
physisorption and chemisorption.
35
5.2.7. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA)
TGA was carried out using a SETARAM (TG-DTA-DSC 1600 °C).
The sample was heated up to 400 °C at a rate of 5 °C/min in a
continuous flow of He. The differential thermo-gravimetric (DTG)
curves were estimates from the TGA data.
36
Figure 5.2. Schematic overview of the gas feed, high pressure reactor and
analysis system connections. Main parts are from left to right: gas bottles, mass
flow controllers, hot box preheating (and post heating), high-temperature reactor,
pressure controller, and heated line 1, GC1. Reprinted from Andersson at al. [57],
Copyright (2012), with permission from Elsevier.
37
reaction operates in the kinetic regime according to the Koros-
Nowak criterion [58].
The expressions used to evaluate the results are the following [57]:
- Selectivity to CO2:
( )
( ) (5.2)
( ) ( )
Because CH4 is detected by both FID and TCD detectors, but CO2
only by the TCD detector, the CH4 in the FID is equivalent to the
CH4 in the TCD without CO2 (CO2-free).
( ) ∑
(5.3)
( )
38
Where Rij is the corrected response factor (relative to methane or a
hydrocarbon compound). The selectivity to the other organic
compounds measured by FID is calculated using the above
equation replacing CH4 by an organic compound (SCorg, FID).
( )
(5.4)
( ) ( )
⁄ ⁄
( ) ( )
- Material Balance:
The total flow (in terms of carbon moles) that enters the reactor
should be equal to the total flow that leaves the reactor, assuming
no carbon accumulation inside the reactor. This relation is given
below and measures the carbon material balance (MB) for each
catalytic testing.
( )
(5.5)
39
CHAPTER 6
41
45
42
39
Rh/SiOcatalyst
Rh/SiO2 2
36 Rh/MCM-41
Rh/MCM-41 catalyst
33
30
Selectivity (%)
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
Methane Higher Carbon Methanol Ethanol Acetaldehyde Acetic acid Acetate
hydrocarbons dioxide compounds
Figure 6.1. Product selectivities obtained from the Rh/SiO2 and Rh/MCM-41
catalysts. Higher hydrocarbons: ethane, propane and butane. Acetate
compounds: methyl acetate and ethyl acetate. Reac. Cond.: 280 °C, 20 bar,
GHSV=12000 mlsyngas/gcat h for Rh/SiO2 and GHSV=3000 mlsyngas/gcat h for
Rh/MCM-41 (From Paper III).
42
6.1.1. Effect of syngas conversion
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50
syngas conversion (%) Syngas conversion (%)
Hydrocarbons CO2 Oxygenates
Figure 6.2. Effect of the catalyst reduction temperature on the product selectivity
over Rh/MCM-41 and Rh/SiO2 catalysts. Catalysts pre-reduced at 200 °C (solid
lines) and nonreduced catalysts (segmented lines) (From Paper IV). Reprinted
from Lopez at al. [60], Copyright (2015), with permission from Elsevier.
43
6.1.2. Effect of the catalyst reduction temperature
The partial pressures of the syngas feed stream (PH2 and PCO) can
modify the product distribution [32, 33]. Thus, the evaluation of
the syngas composition (H2/CO) is important in order to elucidate
the reactivity of the mesoporous Rh/MCM-41 catalyst. In Figure
6.3, the product distribution obtained at low syngas ratio
(H2/CO=1) is compared to the results obtained at higher syngas
ratio (H2/CO=2). The lowering of the syngas ratio decreases the
selectivity to methane and methanol, while in contrast, the
selectivities to higher hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, and acetate
increases. The latter indicates that compounds with high H/C
44
ratios (like methane or methanol) are favored at high syngas ratios
(high hydrogen partial pressure), possibly by increasing the
occurrence of hydrogenation reactions.
36 Rh/MCM-41catalyst
Rh/MCM-41 (H2/CO=2)
33
Rh/MCM-41syngas
Rh/MCM-41, ratio: 1
(H2/CO=1)
30
Selectivity (%)
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
Methane Higher Carbon Methanol Ethanol Acetaldehyde Acetic acid Acetate
hydrocarbons dioxide compounds
Figure 6.3. Product selectivities obtained from the Rh/SiO2 and Rh/MCM-41
catalysts. Reac. Cond. (syngas H2/CO=1): 280 °C, 20 bar, GHSV=6000
mlsyngas/gcat h for Rh/SiO2 and GHSV=3000 mlsyngas/gcat h for Rh/MCM-41. Reac.
Cond. for the experiments with syngas H2/CO=2 as indicated in Figure 6.1 (From
Paper III).
45
reaction taking place during many catalytic processes, is the
water gas shift reaction (WGS) which consumes CO and H2O to
generate CO2 and H2 [32, 33]. If the WGS reaction would occur
over the Rh active sites in the mesoporous Rh/MCM-41 catalyst,
it should also occur in the Rh/SiO2 if water is added to the syngas
feed stream. Figure 6.4 shows the obtained product distributions
found when water is added to the syngas feed stream in both
catalysts. It can be observed that CO2 is produced for the typical
Rh/SiO2 catalyst by water addition. Interestingly, the selectivity
to methanol is also increased by water addition. The latter may be
related to the conversion of CO2 to methanol, as known in
literature [61].
90
Rh/SiO2, feedsyngas)
Rh/SiO2 (only stream: syngas
80 Rh/SiO2, feed stream: syngas + water
Rh/SiO2 (syngas+water)
70 Rh/MCM-41catalyst
Rh/MCM-41 (only syngas)
Rh/MCM-41feed
Rh/MCM-41, stream: syngas + water
(syngas+water)
60
Selectivity (%)
50
40
30
20
10
0
Methane Higher Carbon Methanol Ethanol Acetaldehyde Acetic acid Acetate
hydrocarbons dioxide compounds
Figure 6.4. Product selectivities obtained from the Rh/SiO2 and Rh/MCM-41
catalysts. Reac. Cond. (with addition of water): 280 °C, 20 bar, GHSV=6000
mlsyngas/gcat h (H2:CO:H2O=2:1:2.7) for Rh/ SiO2 and GHSV=3000 mlsyngas/gcat h
(H2:CO:H2O=2:1:1.5) for Rh/MCM-41. Reac. Cond. for the experiments without
addition of water as indicated in Figure 6.1 (From Paper III).
46
6.2. Catalyst characterization before and after catalytic testing
47
48
Table 6.2 . N2-physisorption and XPS analyses of the Rh/SiO2 and Rh/MCM-41 catalysts, before and after the catalytic testing
(From Paper III).
Surface Change in Pore volume Rh0 Rh3+
Catalyst Condition
area (m2/g) surface area (cm3/g) % B.E. (eV) % B.E. (eV) Rh/Si
Rh/SiO2 Pure support 238 - 0.87 - - - - -
Before catalytic testing 236 0.5 %* 0.90 86.5 307.3 13.4 309.7 0.0057
After catalytic testing 228 3.7 %** 0.90 82.4 307.3 17.6 309.7 0.0064
(280 °C, 20 bar, 12000
ml/gh):
only syngas
After catalytic testing 212 10.3 %** 0.88 100 307.2 - - 0.0079
(280 °C, 20 bar, 6000
ml/gh):
syngas and water
After catalytic testing 776 19.3 %** 0.94 100 307.1 - - 0.0100
(280 °C, 20bar, 3000
ml/gh):
syngas and water
* Compared to the pure support. ** Compared to the catalyst before catalytic testing.
6.2.2. Surface composition: Rh0 and Rh3+
49
Rh/SiO2
(100)
MCM-41
Rh/MCM-41
A
Rh/MCM-41 A
15 30 45 60 75 90
Rh/MCM-41 B 2 (degrees)
Rh/MCM-41 C
(110)
(200)
SiO2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2 (degrees)
Figure 6.5. Small and wide angle XRD patterns of pure SiO2 and MCM-41
supports, impregnated with Rh A, after catalytic testing B, and after catalytic
testing with addition of water C (From Paper III).
50
Figure 6.6. TEM images of Rh/SiO2 and Rh/MCM-41 catalysts; reduced A,
after catalytic testing B, and after catalytic testing with addition of water C
(From Paper III).
51
G
Rh/SiO
H2 - Consumption
2
Rh/MCM-41
C
52
Some metal-support interactions seem to be present in the
Rh/MCM-41 catalyst, but not in the Rh/SiO2 catalyst (as
suggested from TPR analysis). However, the Rh surface
composition (in terms of Rh0 and Rh3+) is similar in both
catalysts (as indicated from XPS analysis), which could
result in similar reactivity for both catalysts. Thus, a minor
or negligible effect of the metal-support interactions could
be related to the different product selectivity obtained in
the Rh/MCM-41 catalyst.
In both catalysts, the Rh particle size is kept around the
same value (3-4 nm); as obtained from H2-chemisorption
and confirmed by TEM, thus no effect of particle size on the
product distribution should be expect.
The 1D-channels with small pore diameter of the
mesoporous MCM-41 seem to be retained in the Rh/MCM-
41 catalyst (as suggested from N2-physisorption, XRD and
TEM analyses), which is an important and different
characteristic as compared to the typical Rh/SiO2 catalyst.
This aspect may possibly be mainly responsible the
different product distribution found for the Rh/MCM-41
catalyst. The proposed role of the 1D-channels of Rh/MCM-
41 in the product distribution is further discussed in the
following paragraphs.
Methanation (6.2)
53
Hydrocarbons formation (6.3)
Methanol synthesis
(6.4)
54
more hydrogenated compounds, i.e. ethanol and acetaldehyde, is
found in the Rh/MCM-41 catalyst (92 %) than in the Rh/SiO2
catalyst (75 %). The hydrogenation reactions in Rh/MCM-41 may
convert acetic acid or a C2-oxygenated intermediary, perhaps an
acetyl intermediate [35], to acetaldehyde and ethanol. Moreover,
the selectivity to ethanol is higher than the selectivity to
acetaldehyde (Figure 6.1 and Table 6.1). The latter may occur via
the hydrogenation of acetaldehyde to ethanol, as suggested in the
literature [66]. A schematic representation of the hydrogenation
steps is shown in Figure 6.8.
O O H H
H3C + H2 H3C + H2 H O
OH H H H H
55
species would be available for conversion into hydrocarbon
compounds and more acetate compounds should be expected from
the Rh/MCM-41 catalyst. In fact, lower selectivity to hydrocarbon
and higher selectivity to acetate compounds are found over
Rh/MCM-41 as compared to Rh/SiO2 (Figure 6.1).
56
CHAPTER 7
57
500
1.5
300
1.2 200
100
0.9
0
0.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
P/Po
0.3
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Pore diameter (nm)
MCM-41 Cu/MCM-41 Cu-K/MCM-41
Cu-Fe/MCM-41 Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41
Figure 7.1. BJH pore size distribution and (inset) N2-isotherm of the prepared
catalysts (From Paper V). Reprinted from Lopez at al. [67], Copyright (2016), with
permission from Elsevier.
For all the catalysts, the surface composition consists of Cu0 and
Cu+1 sites as indicated by XPS analysis (Table 7.1). By adding the
metal promoters, the surface atomic ratios are changed (Table 7.1).
When Fe is added to the Cu/MCM-41 catalyst, the ratio Si/Cu is
increased, which indicates that either Fe atoms cover some Cu
particles or some Cu atoms migrate from the outside to the core of
the catalyst particle. While when K is added the Si/Cu ratio is kept
low, suggesting a better Cu dispersion. The latter may be related to
the literature suggesting that K stabilizes some Cu sites,
presumably Cu+ species [68, 69].
58
Table 7.1. Physico-chemical properties of the prepared catalysts (From Paper V). Reprinted from Lopez at al. [67], Copyright
(2016), with permission from Elsevier.
BET Average Metal loading (%) by
Pore Average metal Atomic ratios by XPS
surface pore AAS
Catalyst volume particle size by
area size
(cm3/g) TEM (nm) Cu K Fe Si/Cu Cu/K Cu/Fe Fe/K
(m2/g) (nm)
MCM-41 710 0.49 2.9 - - - - - - - -
Cu/MCM-41 375 0.24 3.2 4.8 28.89 - - 2.8 - - -
Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 72 0.27 14.8** 6.1* 29.30 1.65 2.07 2.9 11.7 5.3 2.2
Cu-Fe/MCM-41
Cu-K/MCM-41
Cu/MCM-41
Cu-Fe-K/
MCM-41
60
compounds is found in typical Cu-based catalysts [71, 72]. The
concentration of water vapor can promote the occurrence of the
Cu Cu-K WGSR which in turn
Cu-Fe promotes secondary reactions such as
Cu-Fe-K
hydrogenation reactions (as explained in Chapter 6 in the case of
Rh-based catalysts).
90 90
Selectivity and conversion (%)
80 80
70 70
Cu Cu-K Cu-Fe Cu-Fe-K
100 60 60 Hydrocarbons
Selectivity and conversion (%)
Oxygenates
90 50 50 Conversion
80 40 40
61
7.2.1. Effect of K as promoter
62
which may produce oxygenated compounds via the so-called enol
route [11].
60 C2+-Alcohols
Acetates
50 Others
20 5 25 1030 0 35 5 40 1045 0
50 540 10
55 60 15
65 20
70 25
75
20 5 25Time
1030 on
0 35stream
5 40 10(h)
45 0
50 555 10
30 60 15
65 20
70 25
75
10 Time
15
15 020on5 stream
25 1030 (h)
0 35 5 40 10
20
45 50
0 55
5 60
10 65
15 70
20 75
25
Time on stream10(h)
0 5 25 1030 0 35 5 40 1045 0
50 5
55 10
60 15
65 20
70 25
75
0
Time on stream (h)
0 55 10
10 15 20 250 30
5 35
10 40
15 45 0 50 5 5510 6015650 705 75
10 80
15 85
20
Time on stream (h)
Figure 7.4. Oxygenates and alcohol selectivities obtained from the prepared
catalysts. Reac. Cond. as specified in Figure 7.3 (From Paper V). Reprinted from
Lopez at al. [67], Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier.
63
ethanol selectivity is 1-2 % on the Cu/MCM-41 and Cu-K/MCM-41
catalysts, this increases to 30 % with the Cu-Fe/MCM-41 catalyst.
By combining Fe and K promoters (Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 catalyst) the
ethanol selectivity is even boosted up to 41 %.
Table 7.2. Space time yield (STY) of alcohols and other oxygenated compounds
over the mesoporous catalysts. Reac. Cond. as indicated in Figure 7 (From
Paper V). Reprinted from Lopez at al. [67], Copyright (2016), with permission
from Elsevier.
Conv. STY (10-5 C mol/ gcat h)
Catalyst
(%) C1OH C2OH C3-C4OH Acetates* Others**
Cu/MCM-41 2.2 27.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2
Cu-K/MCM-41 2.8 42.9 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0
Cu-Fe/MCM-41 10.0 307.2 159.2 61.4 46.4 101.8
Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 4.9 145.4 165.5 83.3 53.0 59.4
* Methyl acetate and ethyl acetate. ** Propanal, acetaldehyde and acetic acid.
64
methanol, as observed from the selectivity trends (Figure 7.4).
Thus, this may be initially related to the CO non-dissociation
and/or CO insertion mechanisms. In the same way, the
hydrocarbon distribution obtained from the Cu-Fe/MCM-41 and
Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 catalysts are similar (Figure 9 in Paper V). This
can be associated to the formation of hydrocarbon compounds
(Figure 7.4) and thus to the CO dissociation mechanism.
65
CHAPTER 8
Conclusions
8.1. Main results of this work
Large efforts are being carried out in order to diversify fuel sources
in the transportation sector, specially the generation of renewable
biofuels. This aims to reduce the fossil fuel dependency and the
abatement of GHG emissions. First-generation biofuels, obtained
from food-related biomass (e.g. corn, sugar cane or vegetable oils)
have some disadvantages for larger production in terms of land
and water availability. As an alternative source of biomass, in
recent years, forest and agricultural biomass as well as municipal
solid waste and different industrial waste products are being
evaluated for producing the so-called second-generation biofuels.
67
catalysts is the mesoporous catalysts based on mesoporous support
which have a 1D-porous ordering with pore diameters of around 2-
10nm. Few studies have been made using this kind of catalysts for
the conversion of syngas to fuels. The first part of the work
presented is focused on the performance evaluation of mesoporous
Rh/MCM-41 catalyst (MCM-41 is a hexagonal mesoporous silica).
The second part of the work was focused on the evaluation of the
effect of metal promoters such as Fe and K on the catalytic
68
performance of a Cu/MCM-41 catalyst. Firstly, the non-promoted
Cu/MCM-41 catalyst produces more oxygenated products than
hydrocarbons; this result is the opposite of that obtained from
typical Cu/SiO2 catalyst. The suggested explanation is that some
water vapour could concentrate in the 1D-pores of this catalyst,
Cu/MCM-41, affecting the product distribution. The addition of
both K and Fe to the Cu/MCM-41 catalyst causes a large
deterioration of the pore structure, resulting in a minor or
negligible water vapor concentration in these catalysts. The most
interesting result obtained from the Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41 catalyst,
was the noticeable increase of the reaction rate to ethanol as
compared to the non-promoted Cu/MCM-41 catalyst; in terms of
space time yield 0.3×10−5 carbon-mol/gcath and 165.5×10−5carbon-
mol/gcath, respectively. This result could be ascribed to a synergic
action of both K and Fe promoters, favoring the CO non-
dissociation and CO dissociation mechanism, respectively. From
XPS analysis, the atomic surface composition in this catalyst has
been found equal to Cu0.34Fe0.08K0.08Si1.00. Further studies are
needed in order to boost the yield to ethanol even more by
modulating the surface composition in the Cu-Fe-K/MCM-41
catalyst.
69
catalysts. Also, the results obtained in this work can be further
evaluated by theoretical approaches (computational catalysis) and
if possible by a micro-kinetic model. Specially, the occurrence of
the water gas shift reaction in the mesoporous catalysts and its
effect on the product distribution.
70
Nomenclature
1D 1-Dimensional
AAS Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy
ASF Anderson-Schulz-Flory
BE Binding energy
BET Brunauer-Emmett-Teller
C1-8OH Mixture of alcohols from methanol to octanol
CTAB Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide
CTL Carbon to Liquids
DME Di-Methyl Ether
DTG Differential thermogravimetric analysis
E10 A blend of 10 % ethanol and 90 % gasoline by volume
E85 A blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 % by volume
gasoline
FFV Flexible fuel vehicle
FID Flame ionization detector
FTS Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis
GC Gas chromatograph
GoBiGas Gothenburg Biomass Gasification Project
GTL Gas to Liquids
GHSV Gas hourly space velocity
HTFT High temperature Fischer-Tropsch synthesis
ktons Thousands of tons
LCT Liquid crystal templating
LTFT Low temperature Fischer-Tropsch synthesis
MFC Mass flow controller
MSR Methane steam reforming
MSW Municipal solid waste
PSRK Predictive Soave-Redlich-Kwong (equation of state)
SEM Scanning electron microscopy
SNG Synthetic natural gas
STY Space time yield
TEA Triethanolamine
TCD Thermal conductivity detector
71
TEOS Tetraethyl orthosilicate
TEM Transmission electron microscopy
TGA Thermogravimetric analysis
TPR Temperature programmed reduction
vt.% Percentage in terms of volume
XRD X-ray diffraction
wt.% Percentage in terms of mass
WGSR Water-gas shift reaction
XPS X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy
72
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisors Associate
Professor Magali Boutonnet and Professor Sven Järås for giving
me the opportunity to carry out doctoral studies at the division of
Chemical Technology. I appreciate their patience, support,
confidence in me and my work and, the possibilities you gave me
to participate in conferences. I want to acknowledge to Dr. Saul
Cabrera for his supervision, support and friendship. Thanks also to
Associate Professor Henrik Kušar for his interest and supervision
during the last years of my studies.
73
I had the opportunity to meet very nice people from different
countries at Chemical Technology. Special thanks to Robert
Andersson, Sara Lögdberg, Mattelo Lualdi, Francesco Regali,
Xanthias Karatzas, Moa Ziethén Granlund, Vera Nemanova, and
Angelica González for good times and fruitful experiences. Thanks
to Fatima Pardo, Rodrigo (Rodri) Suárez, Javier (Barri) Barrientos,
Pouya Haghighi, Francesco Montecchio, Jonas Granestrand,
Alagar Raj Paulraj, Jerry Solis, Sandra Dahlin, Lina Norberg
Samuelsson and Zari Musavi for your kindness and good humor.
Special thanks to Otto von Krusenstierna for being an inspiration
of scientific enthusiasm and charisma at social events. I am also
grateful to Christina Hörnell for correcting and improving the
linguistic quality of this thesis and appended papers.
The deepest thanks go to the memory of mom (mamá Silvia) for all
the love and support. Finally, I would like to thank all my family,
74
especially my wife Hemilse and my son Matias for your patience,
understanding and love.
75
References
[1] Key World Energy Statistics, International Energy Agency, Paris,
France, 2016, p. 80.
[2] Population Estimates and Projections, The World Bank
(http://datatopics.worldbank.org/hnp/popestimates#), Accessed
06/10/2016.
[3] Renewable Energy: bioenergy, International Energy Agency,
https://www.iea.org/topics/renewables/subtopics/bioenergy/, Accessed
20/09/2016.
[4] Global Bioenergy Supply and Demand Projections: A working paper
for REmap 2030, International Renewable Energy Agency, 2014, p. 80.
[5] S.V. Vassilev, D. Baxter, L.K. Andersen, C.G. Vassileva, An overview of
the chemical composition of biomass, Fuel, 89 (2010) 913-933.
[6] R.C. Brown, Thermochemical processing of biomass conversion into
fuels, chemicals and power, Chichester, West Sussex, Wiley, 2011.
[7] K.R. Cummer, R.C. Brown, Ancillary equipment for biomass
gasification, Biomass and Bioenergy, 23 (2002) 113-128.
[8] R. Warnecke, Gasification of biomass: comparison of fixed bed and
fluidized bed gasifier, Biomass and Bioenergy, 18 (2000) 489-497.
[9] S.Q. Turn, C.M. Kinoshita, D.M. Ishimura, T.T. Hiraki, J. Zhou, S.M.
Masutani, An Experimental Investigation of Alkali Removal from Biomass
Producer Gas Using a Fixed Bed of Solid Sorbent, Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 40 (2001) 1960-1967.
[10] L. Devi, K.J. Ptasinski, F.J.J.G. Janssen, A review of the primary
measures for tar elimination in biomass gasification processes, Biomass
and Bioenergy, 24 (2003) 125-140.
[11] R. Suarez Paris, L. Lopez, J. Barrientos, F. Pardo, M. Boutonnet, S.
Jaras, Chapter 3 Catalytic conversion of biomass-derived synthesis gas to
fuels, Catalysis: Volume 27, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2015, p. 62-
143.
[12] J.A. Velasco, L. Lopez, M. Velásquez, M. Boutonnet, S. Cabrera, S.
Järås, Gas to liquids: A technology for natural gas industrialization in
Bolivia, Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2 (2010) 222-
228.
76
[13] Database on facilities for the production of advanced liquid and
gaseous biofuels for transport, BIOENERGY 2020+: International Energy
Agency, Accessed 26/09/2016 (http://demoplants.bioenergy2020.eu/).
[14] Gothenburg Biomass Gasification Project, GoBiGas, Göteborg
Energi (Sweden), Accessed 30/09/2016
(http://www.goteborgenergi.se/English/Projects/GoBiGas__Gothenburg
_Biomass_Gasification_Project).
[15] R.C. Brown, Thermochemical processing of biomass: conversion into
fuels, chemicals and power, Wiley, Chichester, Wiley, 2011.
[16] R. Sims, M. Taylor, J. Saddler, W. Mabee, From 1st- and 2nd-
Generation Biofuels Technologies: An Overview of Current Industry and
RD&D Activities, International Energy Agency Bioenergy, Paris, 2008.
[17] R.E.H. Sims, W. Mabee, J.N. Saddler, M. Taylor, An overview of
second generation biofuel technologies, Bioresource Technology, 101
(2010) 1570-1580.
[18] J. He, W. Zhang, Techno-economic evaluation of thermo-chemical
biomass-to-ethanol, Applied Energy, 88 (2011) 1224-1232.
[19] M.D. Jackson, C.B. Moyer, Alcohol Fuels, Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia
of Chemical Technology, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2000.
[20] C. Wix, Process for synthesis of alcohols, Patent: WO 2013/120548
A1, Haldor Topsoe, 2013.
[21] E. Chornet, B. Valsecchi, Y. Avila, B. Nguyen, J.M. Lavoie, Production
of ethanol from methanol, Patent US 2009/0221725 A1, Enerkem, Inc.,
2009.
[22] Enerkem, Introduction to Enerkem, October 2014, p. 1-23.
[23] Coskata; Process Overview
(http://www.coskata.com/process/index.asp?source=7E352957-657F-
44D4-8CEC-3FCA8BBB2D7C), Accessed 21/05/2015.
[24] INEOS Bio; Technology Platform
(http://www.ineos.com/businesses/ineos-bio/technology/#gasification),
Accessed 21/05/2015.
[25] G.F.T. Orías, J.A. Lordemann, L.F. Buch, A.B. Lanchez, J.C.G. Salinas,
M.F. Fuentes, R.O. Lafuente, R.R. Zurita, E.G. D’Angelo, Perspectivas de
la Matriz Energética Boliviana, Fundación Hanns Seidel, 2011.
[26] Ley para el manejo y tratamiento de la basura, Ministerio de Medio
Ambiente y Agua de Bolivia, Accessed 07/10/2016
(http://www.mmaya.gob.bo/index.php/noticias/0,1434.html).
77
[27] L.F. Vincenti, Estado del Arte y Novedades de la Bioenergía en
Bolivia, Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la
Agricultura (FAO), 2011.
[28] L. Lopez, Evaluación de la tecnología disponible para la producción
de etanol y alcoholes superiores, in Ciencia y Tecnología en Bolivia:
Estado del arte de procesos industriales para el sector de hidrocarburos
y petroquimico, Editors: S. Cabrera and L. Lopez, Instituto del Gas
Natural - Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, La Paz, Bolivia, 2016, p. 52.
[29] A. Dutta, M. Talmadge, J. Hensley, M. Worley, D. Dudgeon, D.
Barton, P. Groenendijk, D. Ferrari, B. Stears, E. Searcy, C. Wright, J.R.
Hess, Techno-economics for conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to
ethanol by indirect gasification and mixed alcohol synthesis,
Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy, 31 (2012) 182-190.
[30] S. Chovau, D. Degrauwe, B. Van der Bruggen, Critical analysis of
techno-economic estimates for the production cost of lignocellulosic
bio-ethanol, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 26 (2013) 307-
321.
[31] Reglamento de Calidad de Carburante y Lubricantes, Gaceta Oficial
de Bolivia, Decreto Supremo No. 1499, 2013.
[32] J.J. Spivey, A. Egbebi, Heterogeneous catalytic synthesis of ethanol
from biomass-derived syngas, Chemical Society Reviews, 36 (2007)
1514-1528.
[33] V. Subramani, S.K. Gangwal, A review of recent literature to search
for an efficient catalytic process for the conversion of syngas to ethanol,
Energy & Fuels, 22 (2008) 814-839.
[34] N.D. Subramanian, J. Gao, X. Mo, J.G. Goodwin Jr, W. Torres, J.J.
Spivey, La and/or V oxide promoted Rh/SiO2 catalysts: Effect of
temperature, H2/CO ratio, space velocity, and pressure on ethanol
selectivity from syngas, Journal of Catalysis, 272 (2010) 204-209.
[35] D. Mei, R. Rousseau, S.M. Kathmann, V.-A. Glezakou, M.H.
Engelhard, W. Jiang, C. Wang, M.A. Gerber, J.F. White, D.J. Stevens,
Ethanol synthesis from syngas over Rh-based/SiO2 catalysts: A combined
experimental and theoretical modeling study, Journal of Catalysis, 271
(2010) 325-342.
[36] Y. Liu, K. Murata, M. Inaba, I. Takahara, K. Okabe, Synthesis of
ethanol from syngas over Rh/Ce1-xZrxO2 catalysts, Catal. Today, 164
(2011) 308-314.
78
[37] C. Li, J. Liu, W. Gao, Y. Zhao, M. Wei, Ce-Promoted Rh/TiO2
Heterogeneous Catalysts Towards Ethanol Production from Syngas,
Catal. Lett., 143 (2013) 1247-1254.
[38] X. Yang, X. Zhu, R. Hou, L. Zhou, Y. Su, The promotion effects of Pd
on Fe-Cu-Co based catalyst for higher alcohols synthesis, Fuel Process.
Technol., 92 (2011) 1876-1880.
[39] C.T. Kresge, M.E. Leonowicz, W.J. Roth, J.C. Vartuli, J.S. Beck,
Ordered mesoporous molecular sieves synthesized by a liquid-crystal
template mechanism, Nature, 359 (1992) 710-712.
[40] G. Ertl, H. Knözinger, J. Weitkamp, Handbook of Heterogeneous
Catalysis, VCH, Weinheim, 1997.
[41] A. Martínez, G. Prieto, The Application of Zeolites and Periodic
Mesoporous Silicas in the Catalytic Conversion of Synthesis Gas, Topics
in Catalysis, 52 (2009) 75-90.
[42] A. Wingen, F. Kleitz, F. Schüth, Ordered Mesoporous Materials:
Preparation and Application in Catalysis, in: M. Baerns (Ed.) Basic
Principles in Applied Catalysis, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004, p. 281-
319.
[43] C.J. Brinker, G.W. Scherer, CHAPTER 3 - Hydrolysis and
Condensation II: Silicates, Sol-Gel Science, Academic Press, San Diego,
1990, p. 96-233.
[44] S. Biz, M.L. Occelli, Synthesis and Characterization of
Mesostructured Materials, Catalysis Reviews, 40 (1998) 329-407.
[45] J.S. Beck, J.C. Vartuli, W.J. Roth, M.E. Leonowicz, C.T. Kresge, K.D.
Schmitt, C.T.W. Chu, D.H. Olson, E.W. Sheppard, S.B. McCullen, J.B.
Higgins, J.L. Schlenker, A new family of mesoporous molecular sieves
prepared with liquid crystal templates, Journal of the American Chemical
Society, 114 (1992) 10834-10843.
[46] X.S. Zhao, G.Q. Lu, G.J. Millar, Advances in Mesoporous Molecular
Sieve MCM-41, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 35 (1996)
2075-2090.
[47] J.G. Verkade, Main group atranes: chemical and structural features,
Coordination Chemistry Reviews, 137 (1994) 233-295.
[48] Perkin Elmer Informatic Inc., Chem3D Professional, 2016.
[49] S. Cabrera, J. El Haskouri, C. Guillem, J. Latorre, A. Beltrán-Porter, D.
Beltrán-Porter, M.D. Marcos, P. Amorós, Generalised syntheses of
79
ordered mesoporous oxides: The atrane route, Solid State Sci, 2 (2000)
405-420.
[50] M. Bowker, On the mechanism of ethanol synthesis on rhodium,
Catal. Today, 15 (1992) 77-100.
[51] Y.M. Choi, P. Liu, Mechanism of Ethanol Synthesis from Syngas on
Rh(111), J. Am. Chem. Soc., 131 (2009) 13054-13061.
[52] R. Zhang, X. Sun, B. Wang, Insight into the Preference Mechanism of
CHx (x=1-3) and C-C Chain Formation Involved in C2 Oxygenate Formation
from Syngas on the Cu(110) Surface, J. Phys. Chem. C, 117 (2013) 6594-
6606.
[53] M. Gupta, M.L. Smith, J.J. Spivey, Heterogeneous Catalytic
Conversion of Dry Syngas to Ethanol and Higher Alcohols on Cu-Based
Catalysts, ACS Catal., 1 (2011) 641-656.
[54] C.H. Bartholomew, R.J. Farrauto, Fundamentals of Industrial
Catalytic Processes, New Jersey, Second ed., Wiley-Interscience, 2006.
[55] J. El Haskouri, S. Cabrera, C. Guillem, J. Latorre, A. Beltrán, D.
Beltrán, M.D. Marcos, P. Amorós, Atrane Precursors in the One-Pot
Surfactant-Assisted Synthesis of High Zirconium Content Porous Silicas,
Chemistry of Materials, 14 (2002) 5015-5022.
[56] M.S. Cabrera, Química en medios organizados para la obtención de
nuevas alúminas, aluminosilicatos y ALPOs mesoporosos con tamaño de
poro modulable. PhD thesis, Instituto Universitario de Ciencia de los
Materiales, Universitat de Valencia, Valencia, Spain, 1999.
[57] R. Andersson, M. Boutonnet, S. Järås, On-line gas chromatographic
analysis of higher alcohol synthesis products from syngas, Journal of
Chromatography A, 1247 (2012) 134-145.
[58] R.J. Madon, M. Boudart, Experimental criterion for the absence of
artifacts in the measurement of rates of heterogeneous catalytic
reactions, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 21 (1982)
438-447.
[59] R.P. Underwood, A.T. Bell, Influence of particle size on carbon
monoxide hydrogenation over silica- and lanthana-supported rhodium,
Applied Catalysis, 34 (1987) 289-310.
[60] L. Lopez, J. Velasco, S. Cabrera, M. Boutonnet, S. Järås, Effect of
syngas conversion and catalyst reduction temperature in the synthesis
of ethanol: concentration of water vapor in mesoporous Rh/MCM-41
catalyst, Catalysis Communications, 69 (2015) 183-187.
80
[61] J.B. Hansen, P.E. Højlund Nielsen, Methanol Synthesis, in: G. Ertl, H.
Knözinger, J. Weitkamp (Eds.) Handbook of Heterogeneous Catalysis,
VCH, Weinheim, 2008.
[62] M.V. Landau, S.P. Varkey, M. Herskowitz, O. Regev, S. Pevzner, T.
Sen, Z. Luz, Wetting stability of Si-MCM-41 mesoporous material in
neutral, acidic and basic aqueous solutions, Microporous and
Mesoporous Materials, 33 (1999) 149-163.
[63] A. Borodziński, M. Bonarowska, Relation between Crystallite Size
and Dispersion on Supported Metal Catalysts, Langmuir, 13 (1997) 5613-
5620.
[64] S.D. Robertson, B.D. McNicol, J.H. De Baas, S.C. Kloet, J.W. Jenkins,
Determination of reducibility and identification of alloying in copper-
nickel-on-silica catalysts by temperature-programmed reduction, Journal
of Catalysis, 37 (1975) 424-431.
[65] J. Panpranot, J.G. Goodwin Jr, A. Sayari, Synthesis and
characteristics of MCM-41 supported CoRu catalysts, Catalysis Today, 77
(2002) 269-284.
[66] A. Egbebi, J.J. Spivey, Effect of H2/CO ratio and temperature on
methane selectivity in the synthesis of ethanol on Rh-based catalysts,
Catalysis Communications, 9 (2008) 2308-2311.
[67] L. Lopez, V. Montes, H. Kušar, S. Cabrera, M. Boutonnet, S. Järås,
Syngas conversion to ethanol over a mesoporous Cu/MCM-41 catalyst:
Effect of K and Fe promoters, Applied Catalysis A: General, 526 (2016)
77-83.
[68] G.R. Sheffer, T.S. King, Potassium's promotional effect of
unsupported copper catalysts for methanol synthesis, Journal of
Catalysis, 115 (1989) 376-387.
[69] L.E.Y. Nonneman, V. Ponec, On the problem of the activity in
methanol synthesis of supported, unpromoted copper catalysts,
Catalysis Letters, 7 (1990) 213-217.
[70] S.V. Sirotin, I.F. Moskovskaya, B.V. Romanovsky, Synthetic strategy
for Fe-MCM-41 catalyst: a key factor for homogeneous or
heterogeneous phenol oxidation, Catalysis Science & Technology, 1
(2011) 971-980.
[71] L.E.Y. Nonneman, V. Ponec, Promotion and support effects in
syngas reactions, Catalysis Letters, 7 (1990) 197-203.
81
[72] A. Gotti, R. Prins, Basic Metal Oxides as Cocatalysts for Cu/SiO2
Catalysts in the Conversion of Synthesis Gas to Methanol, Journal of
Catalysis, 178 (1998) 511-519.
[73] M. Boutonnet, S. Lögdberg, E. Elm Svensson, Recent developments
in the application of nanoparticles prepared from w/o microemulsions in
heterogeneous catalysis, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci., 13 (2008) 270-
286.
[74] A.-M. Hilmen, M. Xu, M.J.L. Gines, E. Iglesia, Synthesis of higher
alcohols on copper catalysts supported on alkali-promoted basic oxides,
Applied Catalysis A: General, 169 (1998) 355-372.
82