4.6 Article

Comprehensive insight into the support effect of graphitic carbon nitride for zinc halides on the catalytic transformation of CO2 into cyclic carbonates

期刊

CATALYSIS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 8, 期 21, 页码 5582-5593

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c8cy01688g

关键词

-

资金

  1. PetroChina Innovation Foundation [2018D-5007-0508]
  2. Advanced Catalysis and Green Manufacturing Collaborative Innovation Centre [ACGM2016-06-28]
  3. Foundation of the State Key Laboratory of High-efficiency Utilization of Coal and Green Chemical Engineering [2017-K28]
  4. Foundation of the State Key Laboratory of Chemical Resource Engineering [CRE-2017-C-109]
  5. Top-notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions [PPZY2015B145]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chemical fixation of CO2 to high-valued chemicals is currently a significant research topic in both the environment and chemistry, and cycloaddition of CO2 with epoxides is regarded as a sustainable route for the manufacture of cyclic carbonates. Homogeneous catalysts including ionic liquids and organic metal complexes suffer from difficulty in catalyst-product separation despite their excellent catalytic activities. In this work, we utilized graphitic carbon nitride (g-C3N4) as a novel support to immobilize zinc halides (ZnX2) through a simple preparation method. Based on the detailed design of the synthesis of ZnX2/g-C3N4, the chemical bonding information of ZnX2 on g-C3N4 was comprehensively investigated by XPS and FT-IR techniques. In addition to activation of CO2, g-C3N4 can anchor zinc halides via interaction between zinc and nitrogen, thereby effectively alleviating potential leaching of zinc halides. As heterogeneous catalysts, ZnX2/g-C3N4 materials showed good catalytic activities in the cycloaddition reactions of CO2 with propylene oxide. Furthermore, a wide range of epoxides can be converted to the corresponding cyclic carbonate with good selectivities (>93%) and moderate conversions (50-88%).

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