English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The preparation of Ru nanoparticles supported on γ-Al2O3 followed by chemical reduction using RuCl3 as a precursor is demonstrated, and their properties are compared to Ru nanoparticles supported on γ-Al2O3 prepared by impregnation of γ-Al2O3 with Ru3(CO)12 and subsequent thermal decomposition. The Ru nanoparticles resulting from chemical reduction of RuCl3 are slightly larger (1.2 vs. 0.8 nm). In addition, Ru nanoparticles were deposited on Stöber SiO2 using both deposition techniques. These particles were larger than the ones deposited on γ-Al2O3 (2.5 and 3.4 nm for chemical reduction and thermal decomposition, respectively). Taking into account the size differences between the Ru nanoparticles, all catalysts display similar activity (0.14–0.63 mol·gRu−1·h−1) and selectivity (≥99%) in the sunlight-powered Sabatier reaction. Ergo, the use of toxic and volatile Ru3(CO)12 can be avoided, since catalysts prepared by chemical reduction of RuCl3 display similar catalytic performance.

catalysts

Comparing the Performance of Supported Ru Nanocatalysts Prepared by Chemical Reduction of RuCl3 and Thermal Decomposition of Ru3(CO)12 in the Sunlight-Powered Sabatier Reaction