Communication
with the nitrogen pore volume. This suggests that methane is
able to access most of the pores in NU-1100 that are accessi-
ble to nitrogen at 77 K. The material has high volumetric and
gravimetric methane-storage capacities at 65 bar and 298 K of
approximately 180 vSTP/v and 0.27 ggÀ1, respectively. Ultimately,
the deliverable methane capacity determines the driving range
of a natural-gas vehicle (NGV). In this case, it is important for
a porous material to have low capacity in the approximately
5 bar range, and high capacity in the 60–70 bar range. The ad-
sorption isotherm of NU-1100 has a relatively shallow gradient
at low pressure; taking 5 bar as the specific lower-pressure
limit and 65 bar as the upper limit, the volumetric deliverable
capacity of NU-1100 is 156 vSTP/v at 298 K. This value is lower
than that of HKUST-1 (190 vSTP/v) and similar to other promis-
ing methane storage MOFs, such as UTSA-20 (170 vSTP/v) and
PCN-14 (157 vSTP/v).[22] However, the advantages that NU-1100
can offer are: 1) high gravimetric deliverable capacity
(0.24 ggÀ1), which is higher than in the abovementioned
MOFs: 56% higher than in HKUST-1 (0.154 ggÀ1), 75% higher
than in PCN-14 (0.136 ggÀ1), and 78% higher than in UTSA-20
(0.134 ggÀ1); 2) high thermal stability; and 3) high water stabili-
ty compared to the abovementioned MOFs. Simulated iso-
therms for CH4, CO2, and H2 are in good agreement with the
experimental data (Figure 3); however, there is a systematic
overprediction of adsorption at all temperatures.[27]
tion measurements, NU-1100 demonstrated high stability
against water. The total volumetric hydrogen adsorption at
65 bar and 77 K is 43 gLÀ1 (0.092 ggÀ1), which places it among
the best performing MOFs for hydrogen storage at low tem-
peratures. The methane volumetric deliverable capacity of NU-
1100 between 65 and 5 bar is approximately 160 vSTP/v, which
is comparable to those of the most promising methane-stor-
age materials, but its gravimetric deliverable capacity
(0.24 ggÀ1) is significantly higher. These results, together with
the possibilities to tune the porosity by ligand extension, es-
tablish NU-1100 as a promising platform to further improve
gas-sorption capacities in a highly stable MOF structure.
Acknowledgements
O.K.F., J.T.H., and R.Q.S. thank DOE ARPA-E and the Stanford
Global Climate and Energy Project for support of work relevant
to methane and CO2, respectively. T.Y. acknowledges support
by the U.S. Department of Energy through BES Grant No. DE-
FG02-08ER46522. W.B. acknowledges support from the Foun-
dation for Polish Science through the “Kolumb” Program. D.F.J.
acknowledges the Royal Society (UK) for a University Research
Fellowship. This material is based on work supported by the
National Science Foundation (grant CHE-1048773).
Importantly, we have tested the cycling stability of NU-1100.
Upon multiple cycles of methane adsorption/desorption,
which are shown in Figure S6.7 in the Supporting Information,
NU-1100 showed no evidence for sample degradation (as was
evident from the straight line fit with zero slope (green-dashed
line)). The variation of the total adsorption at 65 bar is less
than Æ2%, which is within the experimental error of our
measurements.
Keywords: gas storage
frameworks · methane · zirconium
·
hydrogen
·
metal–organic
[1] J. Lee, O. K. Farha, J. Roberts, K. A. Scheidt, S. T. Nguyen, J. T. Hupp,
[3] Y.-S. Bae, A. M. Spokoyny, O. K. Farha, R. Q. Snurr, J. T. Hupp, C. A. Mirkin,
[5] L. E. Kreno, K. Leong, O. K. Farha, M. Allendorf, R. P. V. Duyne, J. T. Hupp,
To get better insight into the nature of the adsorption sites
and gas-framework interactions in NU-1100, we extracted iso-
steric heats of adsorption (Qst) from the absolute isotherms
measured at different temperatures by using the Clausius–
Clapeyron equation (details are given in the Supporting
Information).
[7] O. K. Farha, A. ꢁ. Yazaydın, I. Eryazici, C. D. Malliakas, B. G. Hauser, M. G.
Kanatzidis, S. T. Nguyen, R. Q. Snurr, J. T. Hupp, Nat. Chem. 2010, 2,
944–948.
The results are summarized in Figure S7.4 in the Supporting
Information, showing good agreement with simulated values.
The magnitudes of the Qst values for CH4 and CO2 are signifi-
cantly smaller than in UiO-66, the prototypical Zr based
MOF.[13,16] In the case of UiO-66, the Qst for CO2 varies from 28
to 24 kJmolÀ1, whereas in NU-1100, there is a sharp decrease
from 25 to 16 kJmolÀ1 at low loading. We attribute this initial
Qst value to the presence of OH groups from Zr clusters as the
primary adsorption sites.[16] In the case of methane, UiO-66 has
a Qst around 18–19 kJmolÀ1, whereas NU-1100 showed a Qst
near 11 kJmolÀ1. However, for smaller gas molecules, such as
H2, Qst is almost the same as in UiO-66. The initial Qst of
5 kJmolÀ1 is roughly constant over the whole H2 loading
range.
[8] H. Furukawa, N. Ko, Y. B. Go, N. Aratani, S. B. Choi, E. Choi, A. O. Yazay-
[9] C. E. Wilmer, M. Leaf, C. Y. Lee, O. K. Farha, B. G. Hauser, J. T. Hupp, R. Q.
Snurr, Nat. Chem. 2011, 4, 83–89.
[10] There are only a few known examples of MOFs stable in bulk water
and in acidic solutions. These include: UiO-66-type, MIL-type MOFs, and
Fe2(BDP)3 (BDP2À =1,4-benzenedipyrazolate): Z. R. Herm, B. M. Wiers,
J. A. Mason, J. M. van Baten, M. R. Hudson, P. Zajdel, C. M. Brown, N.
[11] J. E. Mondloch, W. Bury, D. Fairen-Jimenez, S. Kwon, E. J. DeMarco, M. H.
Weston, A. A. Sarjeant, S. T. Nguyen, P. C. Stair, R. Q. Snurr, O. K. Farha,
[13] V. Guillerm, F. Ragon, M. Dan-Hardi, T. Devic, M. Vishnuvarthan, B.
Campo, A. Vimont, G. Clet, Q. Yang, G. Maurin, G. Fꢂrey, A. Vittadini, S.
In conclusion, we have synthesized and characterized
a highly porous and stable Zr-based MOF material NU-1100,
which exhibited very promising gas uptake for hydrogen and
natural-gas-storage applications. According to PXRD and sorp-
[14] J. H. Cavka, S. Jakobsen, U. Olsbye, N. Guillou, C. Lamberti, S. Bordiga,
[15] D. Feng, W.-C. Chung, Z. Wei, Z.-Y. Gu, H.-L. Jiang, D. J. Darensbourg, H.-
Chem. Eur. J. 2014, 20, 12389 – 12393
12392
ꢀ 2014 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim