MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392235042 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25224

Performance of Ni/Si‐MCM‐41 catalysts in CO <sub>2</sub> methanation

2024· article· en· W4392235042 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sérgio Vitor Cavalcanti Trevisan, Lígia Gomes Oliveira, Rodolfo de Andrade Schaffner, Carlos Itsuo Yamamoto, Helton José Alves

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação AraucáriaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsMethanationCatalysisSpace velocityThermogravimetric analysisSelectivityMethaneScanning electron microscopeYield (engineering)Materials scienceChemistryNickelActivation energyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inorganic chemistryPhysical chemistryMetallurgyOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The production of methane from the methanation reaction between H 2 and CO 2 , also known as the Sabatier reaction, is one way to diversify the global energy matrix, providing a use for CO 2 . This work evaluates the performance in this reaction of Ni catalysts supported on type MCM‐41 silica, synthesized y a wet impregnation method. Catalytic tests were performed for 2.5 h under atmospheric pressure. The reaction variables considered were the catalyst nickel mass content (5% and 10%), temperature ( T = 400 and 550°C), reactant ratio (H 2 /CO 2 = 4 and 2.5), and space velocity (VHSV = 5 and 10 L g −1 h −1 ). The catalysts were characterized by Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET), X‐ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy dispersive x‐ray spectroscopy (EDS) analyses before the reactions, and by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), SEM, and EDS analyses after the reactions. The reaction variables were evaluated using an experimental design with 2 factors and 4 variables, in order to determine the effects of the reaction conditions on catalyst selectivity, reactant conversion, and reaction yields in terms of CH 4 and CO. The best result was obtained using a reactant ratio of 2.5, space velocity of 5 L g −1 h −1 , and reaction temperature of 550°C, resulting in 93.7% selectivity for methane, 69.4% CO 2 conversion, 74% H 2 conversion, and methane yield of 20.69%. Findings show Ni/Si‐MCM‐41 catalyst's applicability in methanation, advancing CH 4 production technology, and addressing local demand while reducing CO 2 emissions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207