4.6 Article

Decomposition Pathways of Glycerol via C-H, O-H, and C-C Bond Scission on Pt(111): A Density Functional Theory Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 115, 期 40, 页码 19702-19709

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp202923w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Institute for Atom-efficient Chemical Transformations (IACT), an Energy Frontier Research Center
  2. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-06CH11357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glycerol decomposition on Pt(111) via dehydrogenation or C-C bond scission is examined with periodic density functional theory (DFT) calculations. The thermochemistry of dehydrogenation intermediates is first estimated using an empirical correlation scheme with parameters fit to selected DFT calculations; the resulting estimates for the more stable intermediates are refined with full DFT calculations. Bronsted-Evans-Polanyi (BEP) relationships for dehydrogenation and C-C bond scission reactions are developed and used to estimate the kinetics of elementary dehydrogenation and C-C bond scission steps in the reaction network. The combined thermochemical and kinetic analysis implies that glycerol dehydrogenation products at intermediate levels of dehydrogenation are the most thermochemically stable. Additionally, although C-C bond scission transition state energies are high for glycerol and for intermediates at early stages of dehydrogenation, these energies decrease as the intermediates are successively dehydrogenated, reaching a minimum after the removal of several hydrogen atoms from glycerol. At these levels of dehydrogenation, the C-C scission transition state energies become comparable to those of O-H or C-H scission. These results suggest that C-C bonds are only broken after glycerol has been significantly dehydrogenated and demonstrate that DFT-based analyses, combined with simple correlation schemes, can be effective for elucidating general features of complex biomassic reaction networks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据