4.8 Article

Porous Zirconium-Furandicarboxylate Microspheres for Efficient Redox Conversion of Biofuranics

期刊

CHEMSUSCHEM
卷 10, 期 8, 页码 1761-1770

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cssc.201601898

关键词

acid-base bifunctionality; biomass; furanic compounds; heterogeneous catalysis; renewable materials

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21576059, 21666008]
  2. National Key Technologies R&D Program of China [2014BAD23B01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biofuranic compounds, typically derived from C-5 and C-6 carbohydrates, have been extensively studied as promising alternatives to chemicals based on fossil resources. The present work reports the simple assembly of biobased 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid (FDCA) with different metal ions to prepare a range of metal-FDCA hybrids under hydrothermal conditions. The hybrid materials were demonstrated to have porous structure and acid-base bifunctionality. Zr-FDCA-T, in particular, showed a microspheric structure, high thermostability (ca. 400 degrees C), average pore diameters of approximately 4.7nm, large density, moderate strength of Lewis-base/acid centers (ca. 1.4mmolg(-1)), and a small number of BrOnsted-acid sites. This material afforded almost quantitative yields of biofuranic alcohols from the corresponding aldehydes under mild conditions through catalytic transfer hydrogenation (CTH). Isotopic (HNMR)-H-1 spectroscopy and kinetic studies verified that direct hydride transfer was the dominant pathway and rate-determining step of the CTH. Importantly, the Zr-FDCA-T microspheres could be recycled with no decrease in catalytic performance and little leaching of active sites. Moreover, good yields of C-5 (i.e., furfural) or C-4 products [i.e., maleic acid and 2(5H)-furanone] could be obtained from furfuryl alcohol without oxidation of the furan ring over these metal-FDCA hybrids. The content and ratio of Lewis-acid/base sites were demonstrated to dominantly affect the catalytic performance of these redox reactions.

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

4.8
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