Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
, Esteban Chornet
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, USA
Received 8 October 1999; received in revised form 5 January 2000; accepted 5 January 2000
Abstract
Catalytic steam reforming of condensable vapors (i.e. bio-oils) derived from pyrolysis of biomass is a technically viable
process for hydrogen production. In this study the aqueous fraction of bio-oil, generated from fast pyrolysis, was catalyti-
cally steam reformed at 825 and 875
computer
is used to control the instrument and acquire data
with a Teknivent Vector Two
data system.
2.2. Catalysts
2.2.1. Commercial catalysts
The commercial catalysts used in this study were:
G-91 and C11-NK, from United Catalyst (UCI,
Louisville, KY) and 46-1 and 46-4, provided by ICI
Katalco (Cleveland, UK).
2.2.2. Research catalysts
The catalysts were prepared using the support im-
pregnation method. -Al
2
O
3
support provided by
United Catalyst (G-90 Carrier) was ground and sieved
to select particles in the size range of 355600 m.
Different nitrate solutions (nickel nitrate hexahydrate,
magnesium nitrate hexahydrate, lanthanum nitrate
hexahydrate, cobalt nitrate hexahydrate and chromium
nitrate non-ahydrate) were used for the support im-
pregnation. The catalyst preparation included drying
in an oven at 115
C for
3 h and then the Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst was calcined at
the nal temperature of 850
C for 5 h.
Two catalysts, Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
and Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-
Al
2
O
3
, were prepared to modify the support, follow-
ing the procedure recommended by Cheng et al. [39].
The impregnation with magnesium nitrate or magne-
sium nitrate and lanthanum nitrate was carried out
prior to the impregnation with nickel nitrate.
Cobalt and chromium were introduced to obtain
Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-
Al
2
O
3
. The support preparation was similar to that
for the Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
catalyst. The impreg-
nation of nickel and the promoter was carried out
in two steps: rst, impregnation with nickel nitrate
then impregnation with chromium nitrate or cobalt
nitrate. After that the precursors were calcined at a
nal temperature of 850
C for 2 h.
Catalyst compositions having a NiO content of
15 wt.%, and mole ratios of Mg/Ni=1, Ni/La=8,
Ni/Cr=3, and Ni/Co=3 were selected based on
known commercial and research formulations
[24,31,32,34,47,51]. Before reforming tests all the
catalysts were reduced using hydrogenhelium ow
Table 2
Surface area of commercial and research catalysts
Catalyst Surface area (m
2
/g)
Carrier G-90 (-Al
2
O
3
) 2.5
G-91 16.0
ICI 46-1 12.8
ICI 46-4 11.8
C11-NK 17.7
Ni/Al
2
O
3
2.7
Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
3.1
Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
3.6
Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
4.1
Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
4.9
MgO-Al
2
O
3
2.9
MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
3.1
with a H
2
content of 41 vol.%. The reduction was
carried out for 2 h at 700
C.
2.2.3. Characterization of the catalysts
The catalysts (before reduction) and the sup-
ports (before metal loading) were characterized by
single-point surface area measurement. A stream of
30.4% N
2
in helium was used to carry out these
tests in a FlowSorb II (Micromeritics) apparatus. The
results obtained are shown in Table 2.
All the catalysts had surface areas of less than
18 m
2
/g. Commercial catalysts surface areas were
greater than that of the -Al
2
O
3
support and of the
catalysts prepared in the laboratory. For the labora-
tory preparations only a slight increase in the surface
area compared with the -Al
2
O
3
support was seen
for Ni/Al
2
O
3
, MgO-Al
2
O
3
, Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
, and
MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
but there were larger increases for
Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
, Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and, especially, Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
.
Atomic composition of the catalyst surface was
determined using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
(XPS). XPS analyses were carried out using a Physical
Electronics 5600 photoelectron spectrometer operat-
ing at a base pressure of 210
10
Torr. Photoelectrons
were excited by monochromatic Al K X-radiation
(anode power of 300 W at 15 kV) then collected at
45
C
and a steam-to-carbon ratio (S/C, mole steam/mole
carbon in feed) of 4.92. Several tests were carried out
at a higher temperature, 875
n +
m
2
k
H
2
(1)
This reaction is followed by the watergas shift
reaction:
nCO +nH
2
O = nCO
2
+nH
2
(2)
Fig. 2. Gas production during catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction using Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst, H
2
(), CO
2
(), and CO
(). T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV=126,000 h
1
.
Therefore, the overall process can be represented as
follows:
C
n
H
m
O
k
+(2n k)H
2
O
= nCO
2
+
2n +
m
2
k
H
2
(3)
Initial steam reforming experiments were carried out
at 825
C, S/C=4.92, and
G
C1
HSV=126,000 h
1
.
With the catalyst deactivation an increase in the pro-
duction of CH
4
(m/z 16), methanol (fragment ion m/z
31), benzene (m/z 78), toluene (m/z 92), and naphtha-
lene (m/z 128) was observed. The amounts of these
components measured as signal intensity versus time
is shown in Fig. 3. We estimate that the amount of ben-
zene in the product gas was less than 1%. It can be seen
that the production of these components stabilized af-
ter 15 min of feeding at a signicantly lower level, ex-
cept for CH
4
, than that observed for the non-catalytic
process, in which other components such as phenol,
styrene, xylene, cresol, and methylnaphthalene were
also detected.
These results indicate that under the conditions used
for processing methanol and the bio-oil fraction both
thermal decomposition and catalytic reaction occur.
Though the rate of the latter is signicantly greater,
thermal decomposition cannot be avoided. Carbon is
formed via both pathways. For volatile compounds
this is due to gas-phase reactions. The non-volatile
material present in the bio-oil pyrolyzes in the hot
reactor producing carbonaceous material that, when
transported to the catalyst blocks access to the surface,
deactivating the catalyst. The enhancement of water
(steam) adsorption on the catalyst surface may favor
the gasication of carbon and thus improve the overall
reforming process.
L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239 233
Fig. 4. Hydrogen yield obtained by catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction, (a and b) the reference catalyst, Ni/Al
2
O
3
(,
two experiments)
,
(a) commercial catalysts, G-91 (), 46-1 (), 46-4 () C11-NK (), (b) research catalysts, Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
(),
Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(), Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments), and Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(). T=825
C, S/C=4.92,
and G
C1
HSV of about 126,000 h
1
.
3.2. Commercial catalysts
All commercial catalysts, G-91, ICI 46-1, ICI 46-4,
and C11-NK, were tested at 825
C and a G
C1
HSV of
approximately 126,000 h
1
. About 0.08 g of catalyst
was mixed in the bed with 1.69 g of quartz chips. The
nominal gas residence time in the bed was 0.026 s and
the molar S/C ratio was 4.92. Fig. 4a shows hydrogen
yield as a function of time for all commercial cata-
lysts and for the reference catalyst (Ni/Al
2
O
3
). At the
beginning of the experiment, H
2
yields for the com-
mercial and for the reference catalysts were almost
the same. However, commercial catalysts performed
better (higher H
2
yield) than the reference catalyst at
longer times on stream. After 25 min the H
2
yields
were approximately 65% of the stoichiometric poten-
tial for commercial catalysts while a decrease to 35%
was observed for the Ni/Al
2
O
3
reference. CO
2
yields
paralleled those of H
2
, for commercial catalysts after
25 min on stream they were about 48% of the value for
the stoichiometric conversion and signicantly less for
the Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst. At the beginning of the exper-
iments the amounts of carbon converted to CO were
similar for both commercial and the reference cata-
lysts. However, after 25 min on stream CO production
increased slowly to around 0.3 mol CO/mol C fed us-
ing commercial catalysts. The increase was greater for
the reference Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst.
Fig. 5a presents the conversion of carbon in the
bio-oil fraction to CO and CO
2
. Commercial cat-
alysts and the Ni/Al
2
O
3
reference show similar
performances with a decrease in carbon to gas con-
version from approximately 9080% after 25 min
on stream. In light of the higher hydrogen yields
234 L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239
Fig. 5. Carbon conversion to CO and CO
2
for catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction, (a and b) the reference catalyst,
Ni/Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments), (a) commercial catalysts, G-91 (), 46-1 (), 46-4 () and C11-NK (), (b) research catalysts,
Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
(), Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(), Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments) and Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
().
T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV of about 126,000 h
1
.
obtained using the commercial catalysts it is clear that
the commercial preparations catalyzed the watergas
shift reaction more effectively than did the reference
catalyst.
The evolution of methane, methanol, benzene,
toluene, and naphthalene during steam reforming of
the bio-oil fraction was very similar for all commercial
catalysts. Fig. 6a shows the data obtained using G-91
commercial catalyst. A slight increase in methane in-
tensity and a larger increase in benzene intensity (up
to values of 0.0036 after 25 min) were observed. The
other components were detected at even lower levels.
A comparison of Figs. 3 and 6a shows that although
initial amounts of hydrocarbons generated are similar
for all the catalysts, they increase much faster for
the reference catalyst than for the commercial ones.
This is consistent with the slower deactivation of
commercial catalysts shown by the hydrogen yields.
3.3. Research catalysts
In addition to the reference Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst, four
other catalysts (Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
, Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-
Al
2
O
3
, Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Cr/MgO-
La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
) were tested for the efciency of steam
reforming the aqueous bio-oil fraction at 825
C,
G
C1
HSV of about 126,000 h
1
, and S/C molar ratio
of 4.92.
The hydrogen yield as a function of time for the
laboratory catalysts is shown in Fig. 4b. Compared
to the reference catalyst, the Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
catalyst
performed better (higher hydrogen yield and slower
deactivation). Even more improvement was observed
for the Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
catalyst for which the
hydrogen yield was approximately 55% of the sto-
ichiometric potential after 25 min on stream. Addition
of cobalt or chromium to this catalyst further
L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239 235
Fig. 6. Minor products observed during catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction using (a) G-91 commercial catalyst or (b)
Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
research catalyst, methane (m/z 16) (), methanol (m/z 31) (), benzene (m/z 78) (), toluene (m/z 92) (),
and naphthalene (m/z 128) (). T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV=124,000 h
1
.
improved its performance and also changed the shape
of the deactivation curve for these catalysts for
about 12 min on stream the hydrogen yield was main-
tained at the initial level and then started decreasing.
A slightly higher hydrogen yield was observed for
the Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
preparation than for
the Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
catalyst, though the
difference was within the precision of the analyti-
cal method used. The changes in CO
2
yields during
steam reforming tests using these catalysts showed
a tendency similar to that observed for H
2
while
the carbon conversion to CO increased during the
tests. Additions of magnesium, lanthanum, cobalt,
and chromium resulted in less CO production than
that obtained using the reference catalyst. The carbon
conversion to gas (CO and CO
2
) versus time using
the research and the reference catalysts is presented
in Fig. 5b. The decrease from about 90 to 80% after
25 min on stream was observed for all the catalysts.
As for the commercial catalysts, methane and
benzene were the most important minor compounds
observed in the reforming product gas. Figs. 7 and 8
present the evolution of methane and benzene (in ar-
bitrary units) during reforming of the bio-oil fraction
using the research catalysts. Lower methane produc-
tion was observed for Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
than for the
Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst. It decreased even more signi-
cantly in the presence of lanthanum in the catalysts
(Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
, Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
). Although reform-
ing using the Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
catalyst generated less
benzene than Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
at short times
on stream (less than 10 min), at longer times the ad-
dition of lanthanum proved benecial. The lowest
236 L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239
Fig. 7. Methane produced using research catalysts for catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction, Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
(),
Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(), Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments), Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
() and the reference catalyst,
Ni/Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments). T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV of about 126,000 h
1
.
benzene concentrations in the reforming gas were
observed when Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Cr/
MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
catalysts were employed.
Comparing the efciency of the research and the
commercial catalysts it can be seen that the hydrogen
yield obtained using the former was lower than that
observed for the latter after 25 min on stream. How-
ever, the carbon conversion to CO and CO
2
was very
Fig. 8. Benzene produced using research catalysts for catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction, Ni/MgO-Al
2
O
3
(),
Ni/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(), Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(, two experiments), Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
(), and the reference catalyst
(, two experiments), Ni/Al
2
O
3
. T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV of about 126,000 h
1
.
similar for all the catalysts. Carbon conversion to CO
and CO
2
was less than 100% mostly due to the forma-
tion of coke and char, but also because of the reactions
leading to methane, benzene, and other aromatic hy-
drocarbons. Coke deposits have been observed on the
catalyst surface during steam reforming of even such
a simple compound as acetic acid [18]. At reaction
temperatures thermal decomposition of the organics
L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239 237
present in the aqueous fraction of bio-oil could occur
before the feed reached the catalyst bed. Some of
the oxygenated products derived from the carbohy-
drate component of biomass, especially anhydrosug-
ars, are known to dehydrate rapidly and form char
[52].
The improvement in performance of the research
preparations and the commercial catalysts compared
to the reference nickel catalyst were shown as higher
hydrogen and CO
2
yields and lower COyield. It seems
that the main difference in the catalyst effectiveness
was related to the watergas shift reaction. We ob-
served increased water (m/z 18) in the product gas at
longer catalyst times on stream. Possible reasons for
the higher efciency of the commercial catalysts could
be their surface area (four to six times greater than
that for the research formulations) as well as the lower
surface Ni/Al ratio. Either of these could enhance
steam adsorption on the surface, thus favoring carbon
oxidation reactions. In addition to the watergas shift,
the best laboratory (Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and
Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
) and commercial catalysts
more efciently prevented the formation of methane
and benzene than the reference Ni/Al
2
O
3
catalyst. The
XPS analysis showed that Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
, which produced the
highest amounts of hydrogen and the lowest ben-
zene from reforming the bio-oil fraction, had also
the greatest surface Ni/Al ratio. The commercial cat-
Fig. 9. Gas production during catalytic steam reforming of bio-oil aqueous fraction using Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
research catalyst, H
2
(), CO
2
(), and CO (). T=825
C, S/C=4.92, and G
C1
HSV=62,300 h
1
.
alysts, however, provided similar performances with
lower surface nickel concentrations and Ni/Al ratios
than the research formulations.
3.4. Inuence of temperature, steam-to-carbon ratio,
and space velocity
The commercial and research catalysts tested at a
higher temperature, 875
C, or at a steam-to-carbon ra-
tio of about 11, surprisingly did not show a signicant
increase in the hydrogen production. The changes in
these two variables, temperature and S/C ratio, were
expected to decrease the catalyst deactivation and to
extend the duration of its stable performance. Higher
S/C ratio ought to improve coke gasication and fa-
vorably shift the watergas shift equilibrium. Higher
temperatures should favor the former but negatively
affect the latter. The reason for the insignicant effects
is not clear at this time yet.
A signicant increase in hydrogen production and
an improvement in catalyst stability were observed
when the laboratory catalyst, Ni-Co/MgO-La
2
O
3
-
Al
2
O
3
, was tested at lower space velocity. Fig. 9
shows H
2
, CO
2
and CO production as a function of
time during the steam reforming of the bio-oil aque-
ous fraction at 825
C, G
C1
HSV of 62,300 h
1
, and
S/C ratio of 4.92. H
2
, CO and CO
2
yields remained
constant for more than 22 min. Benzene and toluene
were detected only after 20 min of the experiment and
238 L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239
at much lower levels than those measured at higher
space velocity.
4. Conclusions
We have demonstrated that high space velocities
(up to 126,000 h
1
) and low residence times (26 ms)
can be used when reforming bio-oils (825875
C,
4.911.0 molar steam/carbon ratio).
Gradual deactivation of the catalysts was observed
as a function of time on stream. This resulted in
a decrease of H
2
and CO
2
and an increase of the
CO production. Total carbon conversion to CO and
CO
2
decreased at a slower rate. Also more methane,
benzene, and other aromatics were detected in the
reforming gas at longer times on stream.
The presence of lanthanum in the research cata-
lysts resulted in a signicant decrease in methane
and benzene production compared to that observed
for the other preparations. The lowest levels of ben-
zene in reformed gases were detected when Ni-Co/
MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
and Ni-Cr/MgO-La
2
O
3
-Al
2
O
3
catalysts were used. The improved performance of
those catalysts was due to the benecial effects of
the additives. Magnesium and lanthanum enhanced
steam adsorption that facilitated the gasication of
surface carbon. Cobalt and chromium modied the
metal sites forming alloys with nickel and possibly
reducing the crystallite size.
Although carbon conversion to CO and CO
2
de-
creased slightly with reaction time, the main impact
on the decrease of H
2
and CO
2
yields appears to
be linked to the ability of the catalyst to enhance
the watergas shift reaction. Therefore, we intend
to study the inuence of nickel concentration on
the overall catalyst performance. We believe that
more hydrophilic sites surrounding nickel crystallites
are needed to extend the duration of the catalysts
activity.
Though catalyst deactivation upon steam reform-
ing of complex bio-oils occurs much faster than with
natural gas or naphtha, the catalyst can be efciently
regenerated by steam or CO
2
gasication. A process
for hydrogen production from biomass liquids will
thus require a reactor conguration that allows for
the regeneration and reuse of the catalyst such as
alternating xed-beds or a uidized bed.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Mr. Neil Rossmeissl and
Ms. Catherine Grgoire-Padr, the managers of the
U.S. DOE Hydrogen Program, for nancial support of
this research. The acknowledgement is also extended
to the Secretara de Estado de Universidades, Investi-
gacin y Desarrollo (Spain) for a postdoctoral fellow-
ship awarded to Luca Garcia that made possible her
participation in this project.
References
[1] J.L. Cox, A.Y. Tonkovich, D.C. Elliott, E.G. Baker, E.J.
Hoffman, in: Proceeding of Second Biomass Conference of
the Americas, Portland, OR, 2124 August 1995, p. 657.
[2] E.D. Larson, R.E. Katofsky, in: A.V. Bridgwater (Ed.),
Advances in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion, Blackie,
London, 1994, p. 495.
[3] M.P. Aznar, J. Corella, J. Delgado, J. Lahoz, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 32 (1993) 1.
[4] M.P. Aznar, M.A. Caballero, J. Gil, A. Olivares, J. Corella,
in: R.P. Overend, E. Chornet (Eds.), Making a Business form
Biomass, Pergamon Press, New York, 1997, p. 859.
[5] S. Rapagna, N. Jand, P.U. Foscolo, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
23 (1998) 551.
[6] S. Turn, C. Kinoshita, Z. Zhang, D. Ishimura, J. Zhou, Int.
J. Hydrogen Energy 23 (1998) 641.
[7] L. Garcia, M.L. Salvador, J. Arauzo, R. Bilbao, Energy and
Fuels 13 (1999) 851.
[8] D. Wang, S. Czernik, D. Montan, M. Mann, E. Chornet,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36 (1997) 1507.
[9] D. Wang, S. Czernik, E. Chornet, Energy and Fuels 12 (1998)
19.
[10] D.S. Scott, J. Piskorz, D. Radlein, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process
Des. Dev. 24 (1985) 581.
[11] R.G. Graham, B.A. Freel, M.A. Bergougnou, in: A.V.
Bridgwater, J.L. Kuester (Eds.), Research in Thermochemical
Biomass Conversion, Elsevier, London, 1988, p. 629.
[12] J. Diebold, J. Scahill, in: E.J. Soltes, T.A. Milne (Eds.),
Pyrolysis Oils from Biomass: Producing, Analyzing and
Upgrading, ACS Symposium Series 376, American Chemical
Society, Washington, D.C., 1988, p. 31.
[13] A.M.C. Janse, W. Prins, W.P.M. van Swaaij, in: A.V.
Bridgwater, D.G.B. Boocock (Eds.), Developments in
Thermochemical Biomass Conversion, Blackie, London,
1997, p. 368.
[14] J. Piskorz, D.S. Scott, D. Radlein, in: E.J. Soltes, T.A. Milne
(Eds.), Pyrolysis Oils from Biomass: Producing, Analyzing
and Upgrading, ACS Symposium Series 376, American
Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 1988, p. 167.
[15] S. Czernik, D. Wang, D. Montan, E. Chornet, in:
A.V. Bridgwater, D.G.B. Boocock (Eds.), Developments
in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion, Blackie, London,
1997, p. 672.
L. Garcia et al. / Applied Catalysis A: General 201 (2000) 225239 239
[16] S.S. Kelley, X.-M. Wang, M.D. Myers, D.K. Johnson,
J.W. Scahill, in: A.V. Bridgwater, D.G.B. Boocock (Eds.),
Developments in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion,
Blackie, London, 1997, p. 557.
[17] M.K. Mann, P.L. Spath, K. Kadam, in: Proceedings of the
1996 U.S. DOE Hydrogen Program Review, Miami, FL, 12
May 1996, NREL/CP-430-21968, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Golden, CO, 1996, p. 249.
[18] D. Wang, D. Montan, E. Chornet, Appl. Catal. A. 143 (1996)
245.
[19] S. Czernik, R. French, C. Feik, E. Chornet, in: R.P. Overend,
E. Chornet (Eds.), Biomass, A Growth Opportunity in Green
Energy and Value-Added Products, Elsevier, Amsterdam,
1999, p. 827.
[20] S. Czernik, R. French, C. Feik, E. Chornet, ACS Division
of Fuel Chemistry, Preprints of Symposia, Vol. 44, No. 2,
Anaheim, CA, March 1999, p. 240.
[21] C.N. Sattereld, Heterogeneous Catalysis in Industrial
Practice, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991, p. 427.
[22] J. Corella, A. Oro, P. Aznar, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 37 (12)
(1998) 4617.
[23] L.K. Mudge, E.G. Baker, M.D. Brown, W.A. Wilcox, in: A.V.
Bridgwater, J.L. Kuester (Eds.), Research in Thermochemical
Biomass Conversion, Elsevier, London, 1988, p. 1141.
[24] S. Wang, G.Q. Lu, Appl. Catal. A 169 (1998) 271.
[25] S. Wang, G.Q. Lu, Appl. Catal. B 16 (1998) 269.
[26] S. Wang, G.Q. Lu, Energy and Fuels 12 (2) (1998) 248.
[27] D.L. Trimm, Catal. Today 37 (1997) 233.
[28] J.R.H. Ross, M.C.F. Steel, A. Zeini-Isfahani, J. Catal. 52
(1978) 280.
[29] J.R. Rostrup-Nielsen, Catal. Today 37 (1997) 225.
[30] P.B. Tottrup, B. Nielsen, Hydrocarb. Process. (1982) 89.
[31] J.R. Rostrup-Nielsen, US Patent RE 028,655 (1975), to Haldor
Topsoe A/S.
[32] J. Arauzo, D. Radlein, J. Piskorz, D.S. Scott, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 36 (1997) 67.
[33] D.N. Bangala, N. Abatzoglou, J.-P. Martin, E. Chornet, Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 36 (1997) 4184.
[34] D.N. Bangala, N. Abatzoglou, E. Chornet, AICHE J. 44
(1998) 927.
[35] V.R. Choudhary, B.S. Uphade, A.S. Mamman, J. Catal. 172
(1997) 281.
[36] V.R. Choudhary, A.S. Uphade, A.S. Mamman, Appl. Catal.
A 168 (1998) 33.
[37] E. Ruckenstein, Y.H. Hu, Appl. Catal. A 154 (1997) 185.
[38] J.R.H. Ross, Catalysis, Vol. 7, The Royal Society of
Chemistry, London, 1985, p. 1.
[39] Z. Cheng, Q. Wu, J. Li, Q. Zhu, Catal. Today 30 (1996) 147.
[40] R.M. Sambrook, J.R.H. Ross, US Patent 4,469,815 (1984),
to Dyson Refractories Limited.
[41] H.J. Setzer, US Patent 4,414,140 (1983), to United
Technologies Corporation.
[42] D.N. Bangala, E. Chornet, US Patent 5,679,614 (1997), to
University of Sherbrooke.
[43] . Slagtern, U. Olsbye, R. Blom, I.M. Dahl, H. Fjellvg,
Appl. Catal. A 165 (1997) 379.
[44] S. Wang, G.Q. Lu, Appl. Catal. B 19 (1998) 267.
[45] L. Wenying, F. Jie, X. Kechang, Reac. Kinet. Catal. Lett.
64 (2) (1998) 381.
[46] A.L. Hensley, T.D. Newitt, US Patent 3,893,908 (1975), to
Standard Oil Company.
[47] P. Chen, H.B. Zhang, G.D. Lin, K.R. Tsai, Appl. Catal. A
166 (1998) 343.
[48] C.H. Bartholomew, G.D. Weatherbee, G.A. Jarvi, Chem. Eng.
Commun. 5 (1980) 125.
[49] V.R. Choudhary, A.S. Mamman, J. Chem. Technol.
Biotechnol. 73 (1998) 345.
[50] R.J. Evans, T.A. Milne, Energy and Fuels 1 (1987) 123.
[51] J.S. Choi, K.I. Moon, Y.G. Kim, J.S. Lee, D.L. Trimm, Catal.
Lett. 52 (1998) 43.
[52] M.J. Antal, in: K.W. Boer, J.A. Dufeld (Eds.), Advances in
Solar Energy, Solar Energy Society, New York, 1982, p. 61.