without changing your settings we'll assume you are happy to receive all RSC cookies.
You can change your cookie settings by navigating to our Privacy and Cookies page and following the instructions. These instructions
are also obtainable from the privacy link at the bottom of any RSC page.
Berzelii Centre EXSELENT on Porous Materials and Department of Materials and Environmental Chemistry, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
; Fax: +46 8 15 21 87
; Tel: +46 8 16 23 89
J. Mater. Chem., 2012,22, 10345-10351
16 Nov 2011,
08 Feb 2012
First published online
23 Mar 2012
Adsorption-driven separation of CO2 from flue gas has the potential to cut the cost for carbon capture and storage. Among the porous physisorbents, metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) are a class of promising candidates for gas separation and storage owing to their extraordinarily high specific surface areas and pore volumes, and predesigned pore structures. Here, we report three interpenetrated MOFs composed of Zn4O clusters and rigid dicarboxylate anions, namely SUMOF-n (SU = Stockholm University; n = 2, 3, 4). All the interpenetrated MOFs possess small pores of two different types and high pore volumes. SUMOF-2 had a structure similar to interpenetrated MOF-5, but with an extra-framework cation present in one of the two types of pores. SUMOF-3 was an interpenetrated version of IRMOF-8 while SUMOF-4 crystallized with mixed linkers, biphenyl-4,4′-dicarboxylic acid and benzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid. Among the three SUMOFs, SUMOF-4 had the largest specific surface area (1612 m2 g−1) and pore volume. Single component adsorption of CO2 and N2 was determined at 273 K. We showed that the interpenetrated SUMOF-2 adsorbed more CO2 than non-interpenetrated MOF-5 under 273 K and 1 bar. This may be explained by the increased electric field gradients due to the interpenetration in the MOF. The uptake of CO2 for SUMOF-2 and SUMOF-4 was significant at somewhat higher pressure. Their CO2 isotherms were close to linear, which could be beneficial for separation of CO2via pressure swing adsorption from biogas or natural gas. On the other hand, SUMOF-3 adsorbed most CO2 at pressures relevant for CO2 capture from flue gas.
Fetching data from CrossRef. This may take some time to load.
Journal of Materials Chemistry
- Information Point
This text is added as a work around for heading error in Accessibility testing