SCR catalyst for removal of nitrogen oxides

Abstract

The present invention provides for catalysts for selective catalytic reduction of nitrogen oxides. The catalysts comprise metal oxide supporters, vanadium, an active material, and antimony, a promoter that acts as a catalyst for reduction of nitrogen oxides, and at the same time, can promote higher sulfur poisoning resistance and low temperature catalytic activity. The amount of antimony of the catalysts is preferably 0.5-7 wt. %.

Claims

1. A method of reducing nitrogen oxides produced during fuel combustion, at a temperature of 300 C. or lower, by using a catalyst, the method comprising: processing the nitrogen oxides being produced during said fuel combustion with a supporter comprising titanium dioxide (TiO.sub.2); an active material comprising vanadium compounds; and a promoter comprising antimony compounds, wherein the catalyst is active in nitrogen oxides reduction at a temperature of 300 C. or lower and has sulfur poisoning resistance, wherein the active material is comprised in 1-3 wt. % and the promoter is comprised in 0.5-7 wt. % based on the total weight of the catalyst.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the active material comprises vanadium oxides.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the promoter comprises antimony oxides.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the nitrogen oxides reduction is carried out in an efficiency of 90% or higher.

5. The method of claim 1 which is selective catalytic reduction (SCR) of nitrogen oxides.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the temperature is 230-300 C.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the catalyst consists of: said supporter comprising titanium dioxide (TiO.sub.2); said active material comprising vanadium compounds; and said promoter comprising antimony compounds, wherein the active material is comprised in 1-3 wt. % and the promoter is comprised in 0.5-7 wt. %, based on the total weight of the catalyst.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING(S)

(1) FIG. 1 is a graph showing the NO conversions of Example 1 and Reference 1 at different temperatures.

(2) FIG. 2 is a graph showing the sulfur poisoning resistance of Example 1 and Reference 1 when ammonia was used as a reductant at 240 C.

(3) FIG. 3 is a graph showing the sulfur poisoning resistance of Example 1 and Reference 2 at 230 C.

(4) FIG. 4 is a graph showing the NO conversions of Examples 1 to 7 and Reference 1 at different temperatures.

(5) FIG. 5 is a graph comparing the sulfur poisoning resistance of Examples 1 to 7 with Reference 1.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

(6) As mentioned above in relation to the conventional arts, nitrogen oxides can be reduced to harmless nitrogen and water by using a reductant. Catalysts for the reduction of nitrogen oxides are used and each of these catalysts comprises a carrier, an active material and a promoter which reduces sulfur poisoning and enhances low temperature catalytic activity.

(7) For the carrier, titanium oxides, silicate, zirconia, alumina and the mixture thereof can be used. Preferably, titania (TiO.sub.2) is used.

(8) Moreover, active and promoting materials comprise materials such as vanadium and antimony, respectively. The vanadium includes a compounds (solution) that contains vanadium oxides, and the antimony (Sb) includes compounds (solution) that contains antimony oxides, antimony chlorides (SbCl.sub.3) and the like. Among the impregnated active and promoting materials, vanadium oxide is used as a main catalyst and the antimony oxide is used as an auxiliary catalyst.

(9) The present invention uses titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) as a carrier to combine the vanadium (V) and antimony (Sb) to prepare catalysts for the reduction of nitrogen oxides. When preparing the catalysts, impregnation method, which uses the TiO.sub.2 and precursors containing vanadium and antimony, or other conventional catalyst synthesis methods such as sol gel method can be used.

(10) According to the present invention, antimony is added to promote the reactivity at low temperatures and the sulfur poisoning resistance. Preferably, 0.5-6 wt. % of antimony is added. By the addition of antimony as a promoter, the added amount of vanadium can be reduced, and thus, the sulfur poisoning resistance can be reduced. Preferably, 1-3 wt. % of vanadium is added.

(11) The present invention will be further illustrated by the following examples in order to provide a better understanding of the invention. However, the present invention is not limited to the examples, and particularly, the substances that constitute each layer can be other substances that provide the technical effects of the present invention.

(12) FIG. 1 shows NO conversion without the presence of antimony according to Reference 1 (standard 1) and one with antimony at different temperatures according to Example 1 (type 1) of the present invention.

(13) Reference 1 uses titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier, without antimony added and impregnated with 2 wt. % of vanadium as an active material. Example 1 uses titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier which is impregnated with 2 wt. % of vanadium as an active material and 2 wt. % of antimony oxide as a minor catalyst. The amounts of nitrogen oxides and ammonia used are each 800 ppm, the amount of water is 6%, and the amount of oxygen is 3%.

(14) FIG. 2 shows sulfur poisoning resistances of Example 1 (type 1) with antimony added and Reference 1 (standard 1) without antimony added when ammonia was used as a reductant at 240 C. The same results were observed for Reference 1 and Example 1 as is shown in FIG. 1, and the amount of nitrogen oxides and ammonia used were each 800 ppm. Moreover, the amount of water and oxygen used were 6% and 3%, respectively. In FIG. 2, Reference 1 (NH.sub.3) line and Example 1 (NH.sub.3) line each represent the amount of unreacted ammonia, and Reference 1 (SO.sub.2) line and Example 1 (SO.sub.2) line each represent the amount of sulfur dioxides.

(15) As shown in FIG. 2, in case of a high NO removal rate as in Example 1 (type 1), since most of the ammonia provided is exhausted during the NO removal process, the amount of unreacted ammonia can be decreased, and the amount of emitted sulfur dioxide is nearly similar to the amount of the provided sulfur dioxide of 500 ppm, it can be inferred that almost no oxidation of sulfur dioxide occurred.

(16) However, it is shown in Reference 1 that the amount of unreacted ammonia is increased after about 10 hours, and the amount of sulfur dioxide is decreased due to oxidation. The reduction of the NO conversions after about 10 hours, also called deactivation, was clearly indicated.

(17) Example 1 (type 1), which added antimony as a minor catalyst, showed changes related to the amounts of unreacted ammonia and sulfur dioxide after 16 hours. Thus, not until after 16 hours, could it be determined that sulfur poisoning has occurred. Therefore, as shown in FIG. 2, when antimony was added as a promoting catalyst, the sulfur poisoning resistance was increased.

(18) FIG. 3 compares the sulfur poisoning resistance of Example 1 with that of another Reference 2 (standard 2) using another catalyst at 230 C. Example 1 (type 1) is under the same condition as mentioned above, reference 2 representing a common catalyst that is impregnated with 1 wt. % of vanadium to a titanium oxide carrier and 10 wt. % of tungsten as a promoting catalyst.

(19) The injected nitrogen oxides and ammonia amounts are each 200 ppm, and the amount of sulfur dioxide is also 200 ppm. Moreover, the amounts of water and oxygen are 12.3% and 3%, respectively.

(20) As shown in FIG. 3, in case of a high removal rate according to Example 1, the increase in the amount of unreacted ammonia at different time periods was smaller than Reference 2 (standard 2), and the decrease amount of sulfur dioxide compared to Reference 2 was also smaller. Accordingly, Example 1 was shown to exhibit a remarkably higher sulfur poisoning resistance than the conventional catalyst of Reference 2.

(21) FIG. 4 and FIG. 5 represent sulfur poisoning resistances and the NO conversion of Reference 1 (standard 1) and Examples 1 to 7 (types 1 to 7).

(22) Example 1 (type 1) and Reference 1 (standard 1) are same as explained above.

(23) Example 2 (type 2) represents catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 1 wt. % of antimony. Example 3 shows catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 0.5 wt. % of antimony. Example 4 shows catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 3 wt. % of antimony. Example 5 (type 5) shows catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 5 wt. % of antimony. Example 6 (type 6) shows catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 7 wt. % of antimony. Example 7 (type 7) shows catalysts that were prepared by impregnating a titanium oxide (TiO.sub.2) carrier with 2 wt. % of vanadium and 10 wt. % of antimony. In FIG. 4 and FIG. 5, the amount of nitrogen oxides and ammonia added are each 800 ppm, 500 ppm for sulfur dioxide, and 6% and 3% for water and oxygen, respectively.

(24) First, as shown in FIG. 4, the removal activity at low temperatures according to Examples 1 to 6 (types 1 to 6), except for Example 7 (type 7), was shown to be higher than that of Reference 1. Therefore, it was shown that the range of the amount of antimony that increases the removal activity at low temperature is 0.5-7 wt. %. There can be a deviation of that range of antimony due to the standard of error.

(25) Moreover, the amount of vanadium added is preferably 2 wt. %, however considering the conventional process errors, it is preferred to add a range of 1-3 wt. %. According to FIG. 5, other than in Example 7 (type 7), Examples 1 to 6 (types 1 to 6) showed an increase in the amount of unreacted ammonia and a decrease in the amount of sulfur dioxide with time compared to Reference 1. Accordingly, it can be shown that Examples 1 to 6 all have an increased sulfur poisoning resistance compared to Reference 1. Therefore, the amount of antimony that increases the sulfur poisoning resistance is in the range of 0.5-7 wt. %. There can be a deviation of that range of antimony due to a conventional process errors. Additionally, although the added vanadium is preferably 2 wt. %, a range of 1-3 wt. % is considered to be within the standard of common error.