Ricardo Marques e Silva, Eduardo Henrique Dias, Marcos Augusto Ribeiro da Silva, Milene Corso Mitsuyuki, Jessica Ariane de Oliveira, Gelson Tiago dos Santos Tavares da Silva, Jean Castro da Cruz and Caue Ribeiro
{"title":"A meta-analysis approach to reveal the consensual points in the development of materials for photocatalytic methane reform to methanol†","authors":"Ricardo Marques e Silva, Eduardo Henrique Dias, Marcos Augusto Ribeiro da Silva, Milene Corso Mitsuyuki, Jessica Ariane de Oliveira, Gelson Tiago dos Santos Tavares da Silva, Jean Castro da Cruz and Caue Ribeiro","doi":"10.1039/D5CY00349K","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Significant methane reserves remain underutilized due to the challenges posed by the transition to a decarbonized economy. Consequently, methane combustion should be replaced by pathways that directly convert methane into high-value-added chemicals, aiming to achieve net-zero emissions. This represents a challenge in the current state of the art—particularly in photocatalytic materials, which can harness direct sunlight as an energy source. However, research lacks a consistent roadmap, which is essential to establish a consensus in the literature by statistically identifying promising catalytic materials and reaction pathways. To address this, we propose a meta-analytical study based on a systematic collection of relevant data from the literature to uncover consensus points in photocatalytic research focused on methane conversion to chemicals. The findings highlight challenges arising from the lack of standardization in reporting results and experimental conditions, which hinder proper comparisons between studies. Ultimately, the authors advocate for an in-depth discussion on the standardization of research methodologies, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to uniform protocols in experimental procedures and data reporting to ensure the reliability and comparability of results.</p>","PeriodicalId":66,"journal":{"name":"Catalysis Science & Technology","volume":" 15","pages":" 4501-4514"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catalysis Science & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/cy/d5cy00349k","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Significant methane reserves remain underutilized due to the challenges posed by the transition to a decarbonized economy. Consequently, methane combustion should be replaced by pathways that directly convert methane into high-value-added chemicals, aiming to achieve net-zero emissions. This represents a challenge in the current state of the art—particularly in photocatalytic materials, which can harness direct sunlight as an energy source. However, research lacks a consistent roadmap, which is essential to establish a consensus in the literature by statistically identifying promising catalytic materials and reaction pathways. To address this, we propose a meta-analytical study based on a systematic collection of relevant data from the literature to uncover consensus points in photocatalytic research focused on methane conversion to chemicals. The findings highlight challenges arising from the lack of standardization in reporting results and experimental conditions, which hinder proper comparisons between studies. Ultimately, the authors advocate for an in-depth discussion on the standardization of research methodologies, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to uniform protocols in experimental procedures and data reporting to ensure the reliability and comparability of results.
期刊介绍:
A multidisciplinary journal focusing on cutting edge research across all fundamental science and technological aspects of catalysis.
Editor-in-chief: Bert Weckhuysen
Impact factor: 5.0
Time to first decision (peer reviewed only): 31 days