TITLE:
A Comparison of Two Heterogeneous Catalysis Mechanisms
AUTHORS:
Jiamin Jin
KEYWORDS:
Heterogeneous Catalysis, Catalysis Mechanism, CRMM, EODRM
JOURNAL NAME:
Modern Research in Catalysis,
Vol.8 No.3,
July
31,
2019
ABSTRACT: In this paper, two
heterogeneous catalysis mechanisms are introduced, namely: Chemical
Reaction Mode Cyclic Catalysis Mechanism—CRMM and Electron Orbital Deformation-Recovery Cyclic Catalysis
Mechanism—EODRM (or Electron Cyclic Donate-Adopt catalysis Mechanism—ECDAM. A number of difficulties
encountered by CRMM are listed. The author clearly points out that CRMM is not
credible. This false theory has misled us for more than 100 years. About EODRM
or ECDAM, the article also gives a brief description. The key point of EODRM or
ECDAM is that catalysts do not participate in chemical reactions, and catalysis
phenomena are physical rather than chemical phenomena. It’s completely
different from CRMM. The theory contains three main points: 1) There is a demarcation between the catalyst and the
poison; 2) The active size of the catalyst or the poison size
of the poison is closely related to the electronegative size of the catalyst or
poison; 3) The active size of catalyst is closely related to
the chemical state. The selectivity of catalyst
is related to energy level. Photocatalysis, electrocatalysis, laser catalysis
and microwave catalysis are all physical phenomena. It has different energy
levels. According to this theory, the author thinks that there are several
problems worth studying in production and scientific research, such as: alumina in the Fe ammonia synthesis
catalyst has a serious poison effect on the iron catalyst, resulting in three
high situations in ammonia synthesis production (high temperature, high
pressure, high energy consumption). The support materials of automotive exhaust
purification catalyst have used Cordierite (2MgO-2Al2O3-5SiO2)
ceramic honeycomb support, which has a serious poisoning effect on noble metal catalysts,
a lot of noble metals are wasted, and so on. These problems have long been
ignored by the catalytic academia; the author considers that this reason may be due to
a misunderstanding or mistranslation on the term “catalysis” and “catalyst”.