The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A series of metal–organic frameworks with high methane uptake and an empirical equation for predicting methane storage capacity
Abstract
A series of metal–organic frameworks (NOTT-100a (MOF-505a), NOTT-101a, NOTT-102a, NOTT-103a and NOTT-109a) with variable open copper sites and micropore spaces have been examined as potential adsorbents for methane storage. They exhibit high adsorption capacities for methane at 300 K and 35 bar (181–196 cm3 (STP) cm−3). Supposing that the deliverable amount of methane is defined as the difference in the amount of methane adsorbed between 5 bar and 35 bar, NOTT-101a, NOTT-102a and NOTT-103a exhibit excellent deliverable capacities of methane (136–140 cm3 (STP) cm−3), comparable to the highest of all previously reported MOF materials. The gravimetric methane uptake in this MOF series systematically increases with increasing porosity, while their methane storage pore occupancy decreases with increasing pore size. The fact that gravimetric methane uptakes correlate well with their corresponding pore volumes enables us to derive an empirical equation: C = −126.69 × Vp2 + 381.62 × Vp − 12.57, where C is the excess gravimetric methane storage capacity at 35 bar and 300 K in cm3 (STP) g−1, and Vp is the pore volume of a MOF material in cm3 g−1. This empirical equation can predict the methane storage performance of previously reported microporous MOF materials of Vp less than 1.50 cm3 g−1 reasonably well, and thus provides a convenient method to screen MOFs for methane storage purposes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Large-scale screening of hypothetical metal–organic frameworks
Wilmer, C. E., Leaf, M., Lee, C. Y., Farha, O. K., Hauser, B. G., Hupp, J. T., & Snurr, R. Q. (2012) · Nature Chemistry · doi:10.1038/nchem.1192 · Cited by 1,439
He, Y., Krishna, R., & Chen, B. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee22858k · Cited by 674
Self-citationZheng, S.-T., Bu, J. T., Li, Y., Wu, T., Zuo, F., Feng, P., & Bu, X. (2010) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja106903p · Cited by 373
Cited by
Emerging Multifunctional Metal–Organic Framework Materials
Li, B., Wen, H., Cui, Y., Zhou, W., Qian, G., & Chen, B. (2016) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201601133 · Cited by 1,587
Self-citationEvaluating metal–organic frameworks for natural gas storage
Mason, J. A., Veenstra, M., & Long, J. R. (2014) · Chem. Sci. · doi:10.1039/c3sc52633j · Cited by 1,239
Kökçam-Demir, Ü., Goldman, A., Esrafili, L., Gharib, M., Morsali, A., Weingart, O., & Janiak, C. (2020) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c9cs00609e · Cited by 895
Porous metal-organic frameworks for gas storage and separation: Status and challenges
Li, H., Li, L., Lin, R.-B., Zhou, W., Zhang, Z., Xiang, S., & Chen, B. (2019) · EnergyChem · doi:10.1016/j.enchem.2019.100006 · Cited by 891
Self-citationA review on solid adsorbents for carbon dioxide capture
Lee, S.-Y., & Park, S.-J. (2015) · Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.jiec.2014.09.001 · Cited by 707
Metadata
- Authors
- He, Y., Zhou, W., Yildirim, T., & Chen, B.
- Venue
- Energy & Environmental Science
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2735
- ISSN
- 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-5706
- OpenAlex
- W2056862048
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A series of metal–organic frameworks with high methane uptake and an empirical equation for predicting methane storage capacity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c3ee41166d
- The paper
- He, Y., Zhou, W., Yildirim, T., & Chen, B. (2013). A series of metal–organic frameworks with high methane uptake and an empirical equation for predicting methane storage capacity. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ee41166d
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.