Professional Documents
Culture Documents
C
for 6h. The solution was then ltered and extensively washed with
distilled water to bring the pH to ca. 7. The samples were dried
overnight under vacuum at 120
C within 30min
(9.33
Cmin
1
), then from 300 to 500
C at 0.6
Cmin
1
, and from
500 to 700
C at 2
Cmin
1
. The temperature was maintained at
700
). S
BET
was obtained from the adsorption branch in
the range 0.04P/P
0
0.14 and TPV was recorded at P/P
0
=0.995.
Average pore diameters were calculated fromthe equation d
pore
=
2 TPV/S
BET
, assuming slit-shaped pores. The pore size distribu-
tions (PSD) for 0.4100nm were determined from the adsorption
branchof the isothermusing the nonlocal density functional theory
(NLDFT) method [35,36]. Micropore volume was calculated from
the NLDFT cumulative volume of pores whose size was below2nm.
2.3. X-ray diffraction
Wide-angle X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of powdered sam-
ples were obtained using a PANalytical XPert Pro diffractometer
equipped with a graphite monochromator and Cu K radiation
(45kV, 40mA) in a parallel beam optical geometry. The standard
scan parameters were 1585
and a
counting time of 10s per step. Identication of the phases was
achieved by reference to the JCPDS data les.
2.4. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS)
X-ray photoelectron spectra of reduced catalysts were obtained
on a VG Escalab 200R electron spectrometer using a Mg K
(1253.6eV) photon source. The samples were pre-reduced ex situ
with H
2
at 450
C, at 10
Cmin
1
under helium (AGA Chile,
99.995%) ow of 50mL min
1
. Evolution of desorbed gases was
monitored by a thermal conductivity detector (TCD). In addition,
to quantify the gases produced during thermal decomposition of
the surface functionalities, TPD was coupled with mass spectrom-
etry (Altamira AMI-200 R-HP instrument equipped with a SRS
RGA-300 mass spectrometer). About 0.2g of the activated carbon
sample was rst pretreated at 100
C at
10
Cmin
1
.
2.6. Fourier transform-infrared transmission (FT-IR) spectroscopy
FT-IR analyses of the supports were performed on a Nicolet
Nexus FTIR in the wavenumber range (4000400cm
1
) and with a
scanof 64. Thesamples werepreparedusinga1:100mgof activated
carbon and KBr support.
2.7. Acidity measurements
Acid site concentrations and acid strength measurements of the
supports and selected catalysts were determined using a potentio-
metric method [38], whereby a suspension in acetonitrile (Merck,
99.9%) was titrated with n-butylamine (Merck, 99%). The varia-
tion in electric potential was registered on a Denver Instrument
UltraBasic pH/mV meter.
2.8. Reaction characterization
Reactivity studies were performed in a 300mL stirred-batch
autoclave set-up (Parr Model 4841) at 300
C under N
2
. Once the reaction temperature was attained, N
2
was replaced with H
2
and then pressurized to 5MPa. This pressure
was maintainedfor the entire durationof the experiment by adding
H
2
to the reactor whenever necessary. Liquid samples were peri-
odically withdrawn during the course of the reaction after purging
the sampling line by withdrawing a small amount of the reactant
mixture. The samples were analyzed by a Perkin Elmer (Clarus
400) gas chromatograph equipped with a ame ionization detector
(FID) and a CP-Sil 5 CB column (Agilent, 30m0.53mm1.0m
lm thickness). The injector and FID were held at 275 and 180
C,
respectively. (The GC oven programconsisted of an initial isother-
mal operation at 30
C at
30
Cmin
1
with an isotherm of 22min, and a subsequent ramp
to 275
C at 30
Cmin
1
.) The product distributions were identied
by their column retention time in comparison with available stan-
dards. The initial concentration of guaiacol was taken as 100% in
order to ignore slight conversion before isothermal condition was
achieved. The catalytic activity was expressed as the initial reaction
rate, calculated from the slope of the conversion vs. time plot, as
well as by the intrinsic activity (in moles of guaiacol consumed per
mole of Mo per second). Anumber of repeated runs under the same
conditions were performedtoensure satisfactoryreproducibilityof
the data. The uncertainty in the calculation of reaction rates from
the GC peaks is 3%. The phenol/catechol ratios were determined at
10% conversion of guaiacol.
The stability of selected nitride catalysts during the HDO reac-
tion was compared to that of a commercial reference catalyst
in a stainless steel continuous-ow micro-reactor. In a typi-
cal experiment, approximately 0.2g of catalyst was diluted 1:1
114 I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124
Fig. 1. Pore size distribution of HNO
3
treated activated carbon supports.
with SiC (Soviquim, Chile) and loaded into the reactor tube,
while the remaining reactor space was packed with SiC. Prior to
the reaction, the nitride catalyst was reduced in situ using the
same pretreatment conditions employed for the batch reaction,
while the commercial NiMo/Al
2
O
3
catalyst (Procatalyse, HR 346,
S
BET
=256m
2
g
1
) was sulded in situ using a 10vol.% H
2
S (AGA
Chile, 99.99%) in H
2
, at a ow rate of 67.5mL min
1
and 350
C for
3h. The liquid reactant mixture and hydrogen were connected to
the reactor inlet where they owed downward through the cata-
lyst bed. The conditions for HDO reactions were as follows: 300
C,
3MPa, 5.4g/h of liquid feed corresponding to liquid hourly space
velocity (LHSV) of 27h
1
, H
2
gas hourly space velocity (GHSV)
of 3600h
1
, H
2
/guaiacol molar ratio of 23. Fresh samples were
collected at an hourly interval for 89h with regular ushing pre-
ceding each collection. The liquid products were then analyzed by
GCFID.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Textural properties
The pore size distributions (PSD) for the activated carbons, cal-
culatedfromtheadsorptionbranchof theisothermusingtheNLDFT
method, are shown in Fig. 1. All the support materials have a wide
range of pore sizes, including micropores in the range 0.42.0nm.
However, the results for CGran and Darco supports reveal a pre-
dominance of larger mesopores (upto100nm). Incontrast, the GCA
and GAC supports are more microporous; the latter also possesses
an appreciable amount of larger mesopores (3100nm).
The BET surface areas, total and micropore volumes of supports
and nitride catalysts are presented in Table 1. Signicant differ-
ences in these textural parameters among the four supports are
obvious. The CGranandGCAcarbons bothhave higher surface areas
but the latter has a larger fraction of micropores (76 vs. 32%). The
lowest S
BET
displayed by the Darco support is consistent with this
material having the lowest microporosity (19%) of all the supports.
The porosity of the GAC support is more evenly distributed: 57%
mesoporosity and 43% microporosity.
Oxidation pretreatment of the supports with HNO
3
produced
varying changes in the textural properties of the original samples.
In particular, a signicant loss of surface area (28%), total pore vol-
ume (25%) and micropore volume (24%) was found for the CGran
activated carbon; this is attributed to an increase in the quantity of
oxygen-containing surface groups on the pore walls and entrances,
making them inaccessible to N
2
molecules at 77K [39]. The pre-
treatment resulted in signicantly less micropore volume decrease
inthe GACcarbon(5%), corresponding toa 4%loss of surface area; in
contrast, there was an increase in surface area and pore volume for
the Darco and GCA activated carbons, possibly due to the removal
of impurities fromthe pores. The pore size distributions of the car-
bons were not signicantly modied after the treatment, however.
Results summarized in Table 1 also showthat impregnation of the
supports with Mo and Mo/Co, followed by thermal conversion to
the nitrides, ledto a general decrease insurface area, as well as total
and micropore volume, especially in the case of the CGran support.
These results suggest that nitride formation occurred inside the
porous structure. For the Darco support in particular, they suggest
preferential nitrideformationinsidethemesopores; conversely, for
I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124 115
Table 1
Nitrogen porosimetry results for supports and catalysts.
Sample SBET (m
2
g
1
) dpore (nm) Pore volume (cm
3
g
1
)
TPV V
Darco
as-received
612 2.0 0.62 0.12
Darco
pretreated
664 2.0 0.68 0.14
MoN/Darco-A 561 2.1 0.58 0.13
MoN/Darco-NH 560 2.1 0.60 0.14
CoMoN/Darco-A 475 2.3 0.54 0.10
CGran
as-received
1402 1.6 1.15 0.37
CGran
pretreated
1014 1.7 0.86 0.28
MoN/CGran-A 566 1.6 0.46 0.15
MoN/CGran-NH 571 1.6 0.47 0.15
CoMoN/CGran-A 461 1.9 0.44 0.11
GAC
as-received
976 1.1 0.56 0.32
GAC
pretreated
942 1.2 0.55 0.31
MoN/GAC-A 775 1.2 0.46 0.25
MoN/GAC-NH 752 1.2 0.45 0.24
CoMoN/GAC-A 706 1.5 0.52 0.21
GCA
as-received
1132 0.9 0.51 0.39
GCA
pretreated
1202 0.9 0.55 0.42
MoN/GCA-A 995 0.9 0.45 0.35
MoN/GCA-NH 1066 0.9 0.49 0.35
CoMoN/GCA-A 950 0.9 0.44 0.33
the CGran support they suggest preferential deposition in microp-
ores or at the entrances to such pores.
3.2. Surface chemical properties of the support
The chemical nature of oxygen functionalities present on the
activated carbon surface after HNO
3
treatment was determined
from TPD/MS measurements, as shown in Fig. 2 and summarized
in Table 2: lactonic (190650
C)
[41,42], phenolic (600700
C)
[40,42], and quinone groups (7001000
C) [42,43]. Decomposi-
tion of groups whose carbon atomis bonded to two oxygen atoms
(carboxylic acids, lactones, and carboxylic anhydrides) releases
CO
2
, indicative of the presence of strong acidic sites [21,24]. All
the supports exhibited pronounced peaks at low temperatures
(250400
C
shoulders, which is indicative of the prevalence of phenolic and
quinone groups. The CGran support exhibited a 415730
C peak
which is suggestive of the presence of mostly phenolic groups;
decomposition of these groups, which leads to desorption of CO,
indicates the presence of weakly acidic, neutral and basic groups
whose carbon atomis bonded to one oxygen atom[21,24]. In addi-
tion, integration of the evolved gas TPD proles shows that CGran
Fig. 2. TPD proles of the activated carbon supports.
contained the greatest amount of CO
2
- and CO-desorbing groups
among the activated carbon supports. Table 2 also shows that the
GCA and Darco carbons had similar quantities of CO
2
- and CO-
releasing functional groups. (The H
2
O proles at lowtemperature,
indicatingweaklybounddesorbedmolecules, were not quantied.)
Furthermore, comparison of TPD/MS results of pretreated and as-
received activated carbon supports (not shown) indicates greater
amounts of CO
2
- and CO-desorbing groups in the former. This is
consistent with the well documented effectiveness of oxidative
HNO
3
treatment [21]. It should be claried, however, that if advan-
tage is not taken of the surface oxygen anchoring sites by making
sure, during catalyst preparation, that there is attraction between
the positively charged support surface and the negatively charged
catalyst precursor, or vice versa then the only benet of surface
oxidation can be to render the support more hydrophilic (unless
textural properties are signicantly modied).
Fig. 3 shows the FT-IR spectra of the activated carbon sup-
ports. The supports displayed bands in the 35003300cm
1
,
16001500cm
1
and 15001000cm
1
regions which can be
assigned to anhydrides, quinonic, carboxylic or ether groups,
respectively [44]. There is no apparent difference between the
GCA, GAC and Darco spectra, indicating, in agreement with TPD
results, that they have similar surface oxygenated species. For the
Fig. 3. FT-IR spectra of the activated carbon supports.
116 I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124
Table 2
Surface chemical and acidic properties of oxidized supports.
Support TPD (arbitrary units) Acidity measurements
CO
2
CO Acid strength (mV) Total acidity (mequiv. m
2
)
Darco 12 8 127 2.3
CGran 26 29 290 1.5
GAC 16 16 119 1.6
GCA 12 8 61 1.2
CGran support, a strong band appears at 1691cm
1
which can
be assigned to lactonic groups [44], in agreement with the cor-
responding TPD prole; another two bands were detected in the
31243037cm
1
and 29042844cm
1
regions, assigned to aro-
matic and aliphatic groups [44]. By comparing the spectra in Fig. 3,
CGran support displayed the greatest intensity of carboxylic or
ether groups suggesting that it contains the greatest quantity of
surface acidic oxygen groups. This result is consistent with the
interpretation fromTPD proles.
The surface acidity of the supports was estimated from poten-
tiometric titrationcurves withn-butylamineas theprobemolecule.
The results include the maximum acid strength of the surface
sites (derived fromthe initial electrode potential, E
0
) and the total
number of acid sites normalized by the surface area (acid site
density). The acid strength can be determined according to the cri-
terion proposed by Cid and Pecchi [38]: E
0
>100mV, very strong
sites; 0<E
0
<100mV, strong sites; 100<E
0
<0mV, weak sites;
E
0
<100mV, very weak sites. Accordingly, the results conrmthat
the HNO
3
-treatment produced strong acid sites on the activated
carbon supports. Table 2 shows that the CGran, Darco and GAC sup-
ports displayed very strong acid sites with E
0
>100mV, whereas
the GCA carbon displayed strong acid sites with 0<E
0
<100mV.
As mentioned, the Darco carbon had the highest acid site density,
while the GAC and CGran carbons had similar densities. The lowest
density of acid sites was measured for the GCA carbon.
3.3. Bulk and surface composition of nitrided catalysts
Bulk molybdenum, cobalt and nitrogen contents of passivated
supported catalysts are listed in Table 3. The nitrogen content is
due to nitride formation and the creation of pyridine- and pyrrole-
like functions during ammonolysis and N
2
/H
2
treatment [43]. To
distinguish the nitrogen content due to the molybdenum nitride
from those associated with the carbon support, we nitrided blank
support in a manner similar to that used to prepare the sup-
ported Mo and CoMo nitride catalysts, and performed chemical
nitrogen analysis: the results indicate that between 52 and 73% of
the total nitrogen content of the monometallic method 1 samples
were due to contributions from the supports nitrogen-functional
groups; by comparison, the nitrogen species of the carbon support
accounted for between 27 and 45% of the total nitrogen content
of the monometallic method 2 catalyst; the corresponding sup-
port nitrogen groups for the bimetallic samples ranged 4290%.
This clearly shows that for the same support the nitrogen contents
were consistently higher for samples prepared via method 1 (A-
series). Ammonolysis was thus more effective thanwithN
2
/H
2
. The
measured metal content values, in most part, correspond to theo-
retical values (10wt% for Mo and 2.4wt% for Co). However, some
of the catalysts had metal contents lower than the nominal values
which could be attributed to the possible loss of volatile molyb-
dates and cobaltates during the decomposition steps of catalyst
preparation such as drying and nitridation, a phenomenon which
has also been observed by other authors [22,45]. The bulk N/Mo
atomic ratios (due to the nitrogen structure of the molybdenum
nitride and denoted (N/Mo)
nitride
in Table 3) for the catalysts were
generally higher than the stoichiometric N/Mo ratio for -Mo
2
N
(i.e. 0.5) and -Mo
2
N
0.78
(i.e. 0.39) which suggests nitrogen enrich-
ment, possibly residing in interstitial sites. Table 3 also shows that
the N/Mo ratio was higher for the method 1 samples than method 2
samples; this suggests a higher degree of nitridation of the former.
The surface composition of the reduced and passivated nitride
catalysts was determined by XPS and the results are summarized in
Table 4. The C 1s binding energies consisted of four peaks between
284.8 and 289.2eV. The peak at 284.8eV was assigned to C C
and/or C C bonds of aromatic (and aliphatic) carbon [42,46], while
at 286.3eV it is indicative of C Obonds in phenolic or ether groups
[47,48], or may be due to the presence of C Nbonds [49]. The peak
at 287.7eV is consistent with quinone-type groups or C N species
[49,50], and at 289.3eV with carboxyl groups and esters [48]. The
relative peak intensities (shown in parentheses) indicate the pre-
dominance of aromatic carbon on the surface of all the catalysts.
The XRDpatterns of the GAC-, GCA- and Darco-supported metal
nitrides (see Supplementary data) revealed only peaks due to the
original carbon supports. The absence of Mo nitride diffraction
peaks suggests that the catalysts contained small crystallites of
Mo nitride below the detection limit, or that the broad 002 and
10 bands from the support may have masked the low-intensity
Mo nitride peaks. The XRD results of CGran supported nitrides are
summarized in Fig. 4. The MoN/CGran-NH catalyst displayed the
characteristic peaks for -Mo
2
N
0.78
(2 =37.61
, 62.53
, 75.53
)
together with broad features (2 =26
and 43
, 42.59
, 46.59
).
XPS results of Mo 3d
5/2
, N 1s and Co 2p
3/2
species are summa-
rized in Table 4. The binding energies of Mo 3d and N 1s of some
selected catalysts are shown in Fig. 5. The Mo 3d spectra, shown in
Fig. 5(a), presented two spectral lines centered at 232.60.3eV
and 235.70.3eV corresponding to the Mo 3d
5/2
and Mo 3d
3/2
spin orbits respectively, assigned to Mo(VI) species [51]. This indi-
cates that after the reduction treatment only Mo oxynitrides was
present on the catalyst surface. In the CoMo nitride catalysts the
Fig. 4. XRD patterns of CGran carbon-supported nitrides.
I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124 117
Table 3
Chemical analysis of metal nitride catalysts.
Catalyst Elemental composition (wt%) Atomic ratio
Mo Co N (N/Mo)
total
(N/Mo)
nitride
MoN/Darco-A 10.20 3.70 2.5 0.8
MoN/Darco-NH 9.57 1.59 1.1 0.7
CoMoN/Darco-A 8.53 2.05 4.10 3.3 1.2
MoN/CGran-A 9.62 - 5.58 4.0 1.1
MoN/CGran-NH 10.3 1.26 0.8 0.5
CoMoN/CGran-A 10.1 2.87 4.55 3.1 0.3
MoN/GAC-A 7.6 2.14 1.9 0.9
MoN/GAC-NH 9.97 1.58 1.1 0.8
CoMoN/GAC-A 9.48 1.97 2.35 1.7 0.9
MoN/GCA-A 9.93 2.09 1.4 0.7
MoN/GCA-NH 8.79 1.16 0.9 0.6
CoMoN/GCA-A 8.44 2.03 2.54 2.1 1.2
Fig. 5. The XPS spectra of the (a) Mo 3d doublet and (b) N 1s in selected catalysts.
118 I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124
Table 4
XPS results of reduced-passivated nitride catalysts.
Catalyst Binding energy (eV) (distribution/%) Surface atomic ratio (at.%)
C 1s Mo 3d
5/2
N 1s Co 2p
3/2
Mo/C Co/C (N/C)T (N/C)
nitride
a
N/Mo
b
MoN/Darco-A
284.8 (72)
232.7
0.0140
0.0506 0.0096 0.7
286.2 (16) 396.5 (19)
287.7 (6) 398.4 (55)
289.3 (6) 400.1 (26)
MoN/Darco-NH
284.8 (73)
232.7
0.0159
0.0400 0.0084 0.5
286.2 (16) 396.9 (21)
287.7 (6) 398.5 (59)
289.3 (5) 400.1 (20)
CoMoN/Darco-A
284.8 (72)
232.6 781.4 0.0102 0.0061 0.0468 0.0089 0.9
286.2 (16) 396.5 (19)
287.7 (6) 398.4 (54)
289.3 (6) 400.1 (27)
MoN/CGran-A
284.8 (77)
232.8
0.0088
0.0531 0.0037 0.4
286.3 (14) 396.8 (7)
287.7 (5) 398.4 (63)
289.3 (4) 400.1 (30)
MoN/CGran-NH
284.8 (79)
233.0
0.0176
0.0529 0.0064 0.4
286.3 (13) 396.9 (12)
287.7 (4) 398.6 (55)
289.3 (4) 400.1 (33)
CoMoN/CGran-A
284.8 (80)
232.7 781.5 0.0182 0.0095 0.0088 0.0015 0.8
286.3 (12) 396.6 (17)
287.7 (4) 398.5 (57)
289.2 (4) 400.2 (26)
MoN/GAC-A
284.8 (76)
232.5
0.0128
0.0380 0.0057 0.5
286.3 (16) 396.3 (15)
287.7 (5) 398.3 (56)
289.2 (3) 399.6 (29)
MoN/GAC-NH
284.8 (76)
232.5
0.0157
0.0410 0.0078 0.5
286.3 (15) 396.8 (19)
287.7 (5) 398.4 (62)
289.2 (4) 400.1 (19)
CoMoN/GAC-A
284.8 (73)
232.5 781.3 0.0143 0.0075 0.0485 0.0184 1.3
286.2 (16) 396.3 (38)
287.7 (6) 398.3 (40)
289.3 (5) 399.6 (22)
MoN/GCA-A
284.8 (77)
232.4
0.0139
0.0436 0.0065 0.5
286.2 (15) 396.3 (15)
287.7 (5) 398.3 (56)
289.2 (3) 399.6 (29)
MoN/GCA-NH
284.8 (76)
232.5
0.0146
0.0379 0.0072 0.5
286.3 (15) 396.8 (19)
287.7 (5) 398.4 (62)
289.2 (4) 400.1 (19)
CoMoN/GCA-A
284.8 (72)
232.5 781.5 0.0104 0.0045 0.0421 0.0160 1.5
286.2 (17) 396.3 (38)
287.7 (6) 398.3 (40)
289.2 (5) 399.6 (22)
a
Calculated by multiplying the distribution of N 1s in the region of 396.3396.9eV to the total N/C atomic ratios.
b
N/Mo = (N/C)
nitride
/(Mo/C).
Co 2p
3/2
binding energy was 781.4eV; BE characteristic of Co(II)
species is normally observed at 781.8eV [52], showing a decrease
in positive Co
2+
charge, indicating partial replacement of oxygen
with a less electronegative nitrogen forming oxynitrides [53]. The
result conrms that despite reduction of the passivated catalyst at
450
C, 3MPa H
2
pressure, H
2
/guaiacol ratio of 23.
124 I.T. Ghampson et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 439440 (2012) 111124
Developing a robust HDO catalyst for pyrolysis oil upgrading
is a considerable challenge. Possible reasons for catalyst deacti-
vation during HDO include coking, poisoning and loss of active
sites through surface chemistry changes [11,12]. A preliminary
investigation of time-on-streambehavior of our nitrided catalysts,
compared to a reference commercial sulded NiMo/Al
2
O
3
catalyst,
was conducted in a continuous ow reactor. It is summarized in
Fig. 13 and agrees with the results of Monnier et al. [62]. The liquid
ow rate was chosen to obtain low conversion. The nitrided cata-
lysts displayed higher stability than the sulded catalyst after 4h
on streamunder continuous operation. The gradual deactivation of
the sulded NiMo/Al
2
O
3
catalyst could be due to loss of the sulde
phase during HDO reaction.
4. Conclusions
Use of activated carbon materials with different textural and
chemical surface properties to prepare supported Mo nitride cat-
alysts resulted in their different activities in HDO of guaiacol,
demonstrating rapid production of signicant amounts of phe-
nol. This indicated that the transformation of guaiacol proceeded
mostly through the direct demethoxylation route, bypassing the
formation of catechol. The higher specic activity of carbon-
supported catalysts prepared by using a N
2
/H
2
mixture, compared
to similarly supported Mo nitrides prepared by ammonolysis, was
attributed to a higher dispersion of Mo oxynitride. The dispersion
was related to the surface chemistry and the textural properties
of the support: high concentration of oxygen surface groups on the
support and high mesoporosity of the support promotes better dis-
persion. The most active HDO catalyst (MoN/CGran-NH) was the
one that contained highly exposed Mo species on a highly meso-
porous support. Surprisingly, a generally diminishing inuence on
activity was observed after incorporation of Co to prepare bimetal-
lic nitrided catalysts.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the nancial support of DOE Epscor
Grant #DE-FG02-07ER46373 and the nancial support fromCON-
ICYT Chile, projects PFB-27, PIA-ACT-130 and FONDECYT No.
1100512 grants. I. Tyrone Ghampson is indebted to NSF Career
Award 0547103 for sponsoring a trip to the University of Concep-
cin. The authors also gratefully acknowledge valuable discussions
on N
2
sorption with Rachel Pollock, and the technical assistance of
Nick Hill and Manuel Veliz.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.apcata.2012.06.047.
References
[1] A.V. Bridgwater, D. Meier, D. Radlein, Org. Geochem. 30 (1999) 14791493.
[2] D.C. Elliott, Energy Fuels 21 (2007) 17921815.
[3] E. Furimsky, Appl. Catal. A 199 (2000) 147190.
[4] D.C. Elliott, T.R. Hart, Energy Fuels 23 (2008) 631637.
[5] E. Laurent, B. Delmon, Appl. Catal. A 109 (1994) 7796.
[6] J. Zakzeski, P.C.A. Bruijnincx, A.L. Jongerius, B.M. Weckhuysen, Chem. Rev. 110
(2010) 35523599.
[7] H.Y. Zhao, D. Li, P. Bui, S.T. Oyama, Appl. Catal. A 391 (2011) 305310.
[8] V.N. Bui, D. Laurenti, P. Afanasiev, C. Geantet, Appl. Catal. B101(2011) 239245.
[9] A. Gutierrez, R.K. Kaila, M.L. Honkela, R. Slioor, A.O.I. Krause, Catal. Today 147
(2009) 239246.
[10] Y.-C. Lin, C.-L. Li, H.-P. Wan, H.-T. Lee, C.-F. Liu, Energy Fuels 25 (2011) 890896.
[11] E. Laurent, B. Delmon, Appl. Catal. A 109 (1994) 97115.
[12] E. Laurent, B. Delmon, J. Catal. 146 (1994) 281291.
[13] A. Popov, E. Kondratieva, J.M. Goupil, L. Mariey, P. Bazin, J.-P. Gilson, A. Travert,
F. Mauge, J. Phys. Chem. C 114 (2010) 1566115670.
[14] A. Centeno, E. Laurent, B. Delmon, J. Catal. 154 (1995) 288298.
[15] P.E. Ruiz, K. Leiva, R. Garcia, P. Reyes, J.L.G. Fierro, N. Escalona, Appl. Catal. A
384 (2010) 7883.
[16] M. Ferrari, R. Maggi, B. Delmon, P. Grange, J. Catal. 198 (2001) 4755.
[17] M. Ferrari, B. Delmon, P. Grange, Carbon 40 (2002) 497511.
[18] V.N. Bui, D. Laurenti, P. Delichre, C. Geantet, Appl. Catal. B101 (2011) 246255.
[19] A. Centeno, V. CH, R. Maggi, B. Delmon, in: A.V. Bridgwater (Ed.), Developments
in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion, Blackie Academic &Professional, Lon-
don, 1997, pp. 602610.
[20] A. Centeno, O. David, C. Vanbellinghen, R. Maggi, B. Delmon, in: A.V. Bridgwater
(Ed.), Developments inThermochemical Biomass Conversion, BlackieAcademic
& Professional, London, 1997, pp. 589601.
[21] G. de la Puente, A. Centeno, A. Gil, P. Grange, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 202 (1998)
155166.
[22] S. Echeandia, P.L. Arias, V.L. Barrio, B. Pawelec, J.L.G. Fierro, Appl. Catal. B 101
(2010) 112.
[23] G. de la Puente, A. Gil, J.J. Pis, P. Grange, Langmuir 15 (1999) 58005806.
[24] L.R. Radovic, F. Rodriguez-Reinoso, in: P.A. Thrower (Ed.), Chem. Phys. Carbon,
Marcel Dekker, 1997, pp. 243358.
[25] G. de la Puente, J.A. Menendez, Solid State Ionics 112 (1998) 103111.
[26] T. Nimmanwudipong, R. Runnebaum, D. Block, B. Gates, Catal. Lett. 141 (2011)
779783.
[27] C. Seplveda, K. Leiva, R. Garca, L.R. Radovic, I.T. Ghampson, W.J. DeSisto, J.L.G.
Fierro, N. Escalona, Catal. Today 172 (2011) 232239.
[28] S.T. Oyama, Catal. Today 15 (1992) 179200.
[29] J.G. Chen, Chem. Rev. 96 (1996) 14771498.
[30] I.T. Ghampson, C. Sepulveda, R. Garcia, B.G. Frederick, M.C. Wheeler, N. Escalona,
W.J. DeSisto, Appl. Catal. A 413414 (2012) 7884.
[31] Y. Li, Y. Zhang, R. Raval, C. Li, R. Zhai, Q. Xin, Catal. Lett. 48 (1997) 239245.
[32] J.W. Logan, J.L. Heiser, K.R. McCrea, B.D. Gates, M.E. Bussell, Catal. Lett. 56(1998)
165171.
[33] L. Volpe, M. Boudart, J. Solid State Chem. 59 (1985) 332347.
[34] R.S. Wise, E.J. Markel, J. Catal. 145 (1994) 344355.
[35] J.P. Olivier, Carbon 36 (1998) 14691472.
[36] M. Kruk, M. Jaroniec, K.P. Gadkaree, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 192 (1997) 250256.
[37] C.D. Wagner, L.E. Davis, M.V. Zeller, J.A. Taylor, R.H. Raymond, L.H. Gale, Surf.
Interface Anal. 3 (1981) 211225.
[38] R. Cid, G. Pecchi, Appl. Catal. 14 (1985) 1521.
[39] H.P. Boehm, Carbon 32 (1994) 759769.
[40] J.L. Figueiredo, M.F.R. Pereira, M.M.A. Freitas, J.J.M. rfo, Carbon 37 (1999)
13791389.
[41] Y. Otake, R.G. Jenkins, Carbon 31 (1993) 109121.
[42] U. Zielke, K.J. Httinger, W.P. Hoffman, Carbon 34 (1996) 983998.
[43] J.M. Calo, D. Cazorla-Amors, A. Linares-Solano, M.C. Romn-Martnez, C.S.-M.
De Lecea, Carbon 35 (1997) 543554.
[44] P.E. Fanning, M.A. Vannice, Carbon 31 (1993) 721730.
[45] G.M. Dolce, P.E. Savage, L.T. Thompson, Energy Fuels 11 (1997) 668675.
[46] J.P.R. Vissers, S.M.A.M. Bouwens, V.H.J. de Beer, R. Prins, Carbon 25 (1987)
485493.
[47] S. Biniak, G. Szymanski, J. Siedlewski, A. Swiatkowski, Carbon 35 (1997)
17991810.
[48] S.D. Gardner, C.S.K. Singamsetty, G.L. Booth, G.-R. He, C.U. Pittman, Carbon 33
(1995) 587595.
[49] E. Riedo, F. Comin, J. Chevrier, F. Schmithusen, S. Decossas, M. Sancrotti, Surf.
Coat. Technol. 125 (2000) 124128.
[50] E. DAnna, M.L. De Giorgi, A. Luches, M. Martino, A. Perrone, A. Zocco, Thin Solid
Films 347 (1999) 7277.
[51] S.W. Yang, C. Li, J. Xu, Q. Xin, J. Phys. Chem. B 102 (1998) 69866993.
[52] J.S. Girardon, E. Quinet, A. Griboval-Constant, P.A. Chernavskii, L. Gengembre,
A.Y. Khodakov, J. Catal. 248 (2007) 143157.
[53] M.L. Kaliya, S.B. Kogan, Catal. Today 106 (2005) 9598.
[54] R.J.J. Jansen, H. van Bekkum, Carbon 33 (1995) 10211027.
[55] K. Hada, M. Nagai, S. Omi, J. Phys. Chem. B 105 (2001) 40844093.
[56] A.M. Venezia, Catal. Today 77 (2003) 359370.
[57] V.N. Bui, G. Toussaint, D. Laurenti, C. Mirodatos, C. Geantet, Catal. Today 143
(2009) 172178.
[58] G. Lagos, R. Garca, A.L. Agudo, M. Yates, J.L.G. Fierro, F.J. Gil-Llambas, N.
Escalona, Appl. Catal. A 358 (2009) 2631.
[59] G. Frapper, M. Pelissier, J. Hafner, J. Phys. Chem. B 104 (2000) 1197211976.
[60] M. Ferrari, S. Bosmans, R. Maggi, B. Delmon, P. Grange, Catal. Today 65 (2001)
257264.
[61] C. Seplveda, N. Escalona, R. Garcia, D. Laurenti, M. Vrinat, First International
Congress on Catalysis for Bioreneries (CatBior), Torremolinos-Mlaga, Spain,
2011.
[62] J. Monnier, H. Sulimma, A. Dalai, G. Caravaggio, Appl. Catal. A 382 (2010)
176180.