4.6 Article

Highly Selective Capture of the Greenhouse Gas CO2 in Polymers

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 3, 期 12, 页码 3077-3085

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00544

关键词

Polymer; Secondary amine; CO2 capture; Selective adsorption; Energy-saving regeneration

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21576137]
  2. Distinguished Youth Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20130045]
  3. Fok Ying-Tong Education Foundation [141069]
  4. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2013CB733504]
  5. Project of Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Owing to their high physicochemical stability and low skeleton density, polymers are highly promising for capturing the greenhouse gas CO,. However, complicated monomers, expensive catalysts, and/or severe conditions are usually required for their synthesis, which makes the process costly, tedious, and hard to scale up. In this paper, a facile nucleophilic substitution reaction is developed to synthesize polymers from low-cost monomers, namely chloromethylbenzene and various diamines. Due to the appropriate reactivity of monomers, the polymerization takes place at a low temperature of about 60 degrees C in the absence of any catalysts. A series of polymers containing plentiful secondary amines are successfully fabricated; these secondary amines provide a proper adsorbate-adsorbent interaction from the viewpoints of selective capture of CO2 and energy-efficient regeneration of adsorbents. Moreover, the materials possess well-defined micropores with the dimension close to the size of adsorbate molecules and subsequently, exhibit the molecule sieving effect. As a result, these materials are active in selective adsorption of CO, and show high CO2/N-2 and CO2/CH4 selectivities. More importantly, the adsorbents can be completely regenerated under mild conditions, and no loss in activity is detected after eight cycles.

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