生物质燃气重整净化特性及催化剂研究

随着化石燃料的短缺和环境问题的加剧，生物质作为一种清洁的可再生能源日益受到全世界的关注和重视，由生物质制备合成气进而合成液体燃料也成为众多学者关注的热点。目前，生物质气化和费托合成都已具有工业生产装置和成熟的生产工艺，生物质合成燃料的关键技术在于两段技术的匹配和集成，即生物质合成气的制备。 制备生物质合成气的气化粗燃气中的焦炭和焦油不仅堵塞送气管道，使气化设备的运行发生困难，甚至能引起催化剂的严重失活，目前已成为燃气高品位利用的瓶颈，特别是在液体燃料合成领域。因此生物质气化粗燃气的深度净化处理已引起国内外研究者的高度重视。目前，应用于生物质气化燃气净化的商业催化剂存在积碳严重、易失活、寿命短等问题，亟待寻找、开发新型高稳催化剂。为了提高催化剂的稳定性，本文采用共沉淀的方法制备了以CeO2和La2O3作为助剂的镍基催化剂，结合生物质模拟燃气净化特性和生物质燃气净化性能、生物质焦油典型组分萘的转化特性和生物质焦油的转化特性综合评价了自制镍基催化剂的重整净化性能并进一步探索了净化机理，得到如下结论： 1. CeO2和La2O3助催的镍基催化剂中镍晶粒均小于NiMgO催化剂，表明助剂CeO2和La2O3有利于提高催化剂中镍晶粒的分散，增加了催化剂表面活性位，进而提高了催化剂的活性及抗积碳性能。 2.结合模拟生物质燃气和真实燃气重整净化反应，得出：国产烃类蒸汽转化催 化剂Z405具有良好的重整净化效果，其性质接近国外进口催化剂，适用于生物质燃气重整，但催化剂抗积碳性能差，寿命较短，与实际应用存在一定距离。自制未添加助剂的低含量镍基催化剂活性不高，随着重整温度的升高活性无显著改观；添加CeO2和La2O3助剂的催化剂低温（〈700℃）区活性不高，但随着温度的升高活性有明显提升，尤其以添加Ce的几种催化剂活性改变最为显著。同时自制镍基催化剂显示出优异的稳定性，镍含量较高的Ni0.10Mg0.90O和Ni0.10Mg0.89Ce0.01O催化剂连续40个小时的实验未观察到活性明显下降。 3.自制NiMgO催化剂对模拟焦油萘和真实焦油均具有优异的催化重整净化性 能，在其作用下，模拟焦油萘全部转化为H2、CO等不凝性气体，焦油组分的种类和含量也均大幅度的减少，且各组分残余量极小，残余物为μg/m3级的苯、甲苯、苯乙烯等物质，满足下游产品的生产要求，自制镍基催化剂显示出优异的催化重整净化特性

生物质燃气催化重整净化的特性研究

通过改变生物质燃气重整过程中重整温度、反应时间、水蒸气的添加等参数，考察了国产烃类蒸汽转化催化剂Z405重整净化生物质燃气的性能及对合成气化学当量比的调变作用。结果表明：在Z405的作用下，生物质燃气中CH4和C2转化率均高达95％以上，合成气中CH4和C2的含量分别低于0．500％和0．005％，心与CO含量有显著增加，CO2含量有所减少。添加水蒸气后H2CO值较之无水蒸气的添加发生了显著变化，从0．70提高到1．15，气体低热值有所增大。提高重整温度对生物质合成气组分具有显著的调变作用，心和CO含量增幅随温度升高而增加，CH4与C2组分含量降低幅度也随温度升高而增加。但当重整温度超过780℃时，对合成气组分调整作用不明显。重整生物质燃气组分在60min内无明显改变，未检测到催化剂活性降低、失重及积炭

塔里木河中下游荒漠化防治与生态系统管理研究与示范

该项目成果建立了荒漠区生态环境与经济和谐发展的模式，为正确处理生态环境建设与经济发展的关系提供了理论依据；建立了塔里木河中下游土地利用的5种模式和适宜性评价体系；创立了塔里木河中下游生态经济型植被的模式和结构优化配置方案；提出了6项绿洲灌溉农业节水节肥和棉花高产技术；确定了维护塔里木河中下游至大西海子和台特马湖生态安全的最低年需水量、最佳输水期，提出了塔里木河中下游天然植被合理地下水位的科学依据；揭示了塔里木河中下游30年断流输水后地表生态的响应规律；构建了数字塔河的框架，完成了水、土、植被等23个因子的图层

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials