from first principles PP-I-1

OP-III-14Investigation on the Kinetic Behavior of Bio-Ethanol Steam Reforming overBimetallic Catalysts Supported on Cerium OxidePalma V. 1 , Castaldo F. 2 , Ciambelli P. 1 , Iaquaniello G.1 Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale, Università di Salerno,Via Ponte Don Melillo 84084 Fisciano (SA), Italy2 Tecnimont KT S.p.A., Viale Castello della Magliana 75, 00148 Roma, Italyfcastaldo@unisa.itIn the last years, ethanol has become attractive as a fuel source and a possible energy carrierwithin the hydrogen economy for fuel cells applications. The ethanol steam reforming (ESR)reaction seems to be a very promising method, combining the renewability of the feedstockwith other advantages like the possibility to easily handle, store and transport a liquid, thenon-toxicity and the absence of sulphur atoms. Prior research of ESR at high temperatures(> 400°C) has identified several metallic and oxide-based catalyst systems that improveethanol conversion, hydrogen production, and catalyst stability [1]. At low temperatures, itcan be possible to reduce the thermal duty and to enhance plant compactness. But somethermodynamic limit was the main drawback: several secondary reactions maybe promotedinstead of the desired process, with the formation of coke precursors, very dangerous for thecatalyst stability [2].The objective of this paper is the choice of a catalyst with by different properties: highactivity in the low temperature-ESR reaction, high selectivity towards H 2 , ability to promoteWGS reaction for the CO removal and to minimize coke formation, high stability. Manycatalysts based on Pt, Ni and Co and supported on cerium oxide were prepared, characterizedand tested, in terms of activity, selectivity and stability. The results were very interesting,since the total ethanol conversion and high H 2 yield were obtained, yet at 400°C and 240 ms.The reaction mechanism was also determined for the 3wt%Pt/10wt%Ni/CeO 2 sample. Theresults were in agreement with the literature [3] demonstrating that the combination ofsequential reactions occurs, instead of the direct desired reaction that allows the production of6 moles of H 2 from 1 mole of CH 4 .References:[1] E. Heracleous, A. F. Leeb, K. Wilson, A. A. Lemonidou, Journal of Catalysis 231(2005) 159–171.[2] B. Banach, A. Machocki, P. Rybak, A. Denis, W. Grzegorczyk, W. Gac, Catalysis Today 176(2011) 28– 35.[3] F. Soyal-Baltacıoglu, A. E. Aksoylu, Z. I. Onsan, Catalysis Today, 138 (2008) 183–186.57