Catalysis Sciences & Engineering, Short talk
CE-017

The role of synthesis in tuning Fe speciation in Fe-ZSM-5 toward NO-assisted N2O decomposition

G. Dutca1,2, D. C. Cano-Blanco1,2, M. Ameres1,3, K. Raue4, M. Agrachev4, G. Jeschke4, D. Ferri1*, O. Kröcher1,2*
1Paul Scherrer Institute, PSI Center for Energy and Environmental Sciences, 5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland, 2Institute for Chemical Science and Engineering, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland, 3Institute of Materials, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland, 4Institute for Molecular Physical Science, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland

Iron-exchanged zeolites are redox-active materials able to activate N2O, a potent greenhouse gas and environmental pollutant, making them highly relevant in environmental catalytic processes, such as N2O decomposition [1] and NO-N2O-SCR [2], and in direct chemical oxidations, such as methane to methanol [3]. The sites capable of N2O activation in CHA and FER topologies have been identified as isolated iron ions stabilized by six-membered rings of the zeolite framework [1], [2]. However, controlling the iron speciation and distribution by synthesis has proven challenging, as isolated iron ions often coexist with oligomers and particle-like species.

In this work, we studied the influence of the preparation method, post-treatment, and the nature of the iron precursor on the iron speciation and distribution in ZSM-5. Standard characterization and catalytic testing were combined with in situ XAS and EPR spectroscopy to monitor the iron species during pulsed NO-assisted N2O decomposition experiments.

Iron-exchanged ZSM-5 samples were prepared by incipient wetness impregnation (IWI) with iron acetylacetonate (Fe(acac)3), and by hydrothermal synthesis (HTS) using Fe(NO3)3 and Fe(acac)3. All calcined materials were also exposed to high‑temperature treatment in Ar flow to promote the redispersion of clustered species into isolated iron ions [3]. This was confirmed by ex-situ DRUV spectroscopy, through a decrease of the oligomer-specific bands. Catalytic testing indicated higher activity of Ar-treated catalysts, with N2O conversion of ca. 50% at 400 °C, compared to only ca. 23% N2O conversion for the non-Ar-treated counterparts. This distinct behavior pointed to an increase in active site population for the Ar-treated materials.

Fe K-edge quick-XANES experiments indicated that only a minor fraction of Fe species can accomplish a complete redox cycle Fe3+ ↔ Fe2+. The reversible changes in the pre-edge and rising edge were revealed exclusively through pulsed experiments. EPR spectroscopy experiments further emphasized the differences in the Fe speciation across synthesis procedures and post-treatment. In particular, the IWI-synthesized and Ar‑treated material exhibited a strong signal at g’ = 2, which was previously assigned to contributions from isolated Fe in the α-exchange cationic position and clustered Fe species [4]. Our pulsed EPR experiments (N2O in NO/Ar at 400 °C) showed the reversible change of the g’ = 2 signal (Fe3+ ↔ Fe2), alongside the g’ = 6 signal characteristic of isolated Fe sites in six-membered rings (β-exchange cationic position), suggesting that two distinct isolated Fe species interact reversibly with the N2O/NO system [4]. The absence of the g’ = 2 signal in the non-Ar-treated counterpart pointed to the role of the post-treatment in fixing the Fe ions in precise cationic positions in ZSM-5. The nature of the iron precursor affected the speciation similarly. By coupling catalytic testing with pulsed in situ spectroscopic experiments, we show that post-treatment and iron precursor type influence Fe speciation in Fe-ZSM-5. These findings contribute to the improved design of catalysts for NO-assisted N2O-decomposition.

[1] D.C. Cano-Blanco, J.W.A. Fischer, F. Buttignol, I. Alxneit, G. Jeschke, O. Kröcher, D. Ferri, ACS Catalysis, 2025, 15, 17.[2] F. Buttignol, A. Garbujo, P. Biasi, O. Kröcher, D. Ferri, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2025, 147, 10.[3] M.L. Bols, J. Devos, H.M. Rhoda, D. Plessers, E.I. Solomon, R.A. Schoonheydt, B.F. Sels, M. Dusselier, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2025, 143, 1624.[4] E. Berrier, O. Ovsitser, E.V. Kondratenko, M. Schwidder, W. Grünert, A. Brückner, Journal of Catalysis, 2007, 249, 67.