4.5 Article

Conversion of biomass-derived carbohydrates into 5-hydroxymethylfurfural catalyzed by sulfonic acid-functionalized carbon material with high strong-acid density in gamma-valerolactone

期刊

RESEARCH ON CHEMICAL INTERMEDIATES
卷 44, 期 9, 页码 5439-5453

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11164-018-3432-y

关键词

Carbohydrate; Fructose; Glucose; 5-Hydroxymethylfurfural; gamma-Valerolactone; Carbon solid acid

资金

  1. State Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China [51536009]
  2. Science and Technological Fund of Anhui Province for Outstanding Youth [1508085J01]
  3. National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2015BAD15B06]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A carbonaceous solid acid catalyst with high strong-acid density was synthesized by facile functionalization of a biomass-derived mesoporous carbon with benzenesulfonic acid. The catalyst was characterized by using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, elemental analysis, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy, and N-2 adsorption-desorption. The carbonaceous solid catalyst containing Bronsted acid sites was used for the production of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) from hexoses such as fructose, glucose, and cellulose in gamma-valerolactone (GVL)-H2O mixture. By reaction at 130 degrees C for 20 min using fructose as a feedstock, an HMF yield 78.1% was achieved. The catalytic performance of the catalyst in conversion of fructose into HMF hardly changed over seven cycles, demonstrating that the catalyst had excellent recyclability. The yields of HMF derived from glucose and cellulose reached 33.2 and 22.5%, respectively, whereas those of total furans were 42.1 and 33.7%, respectively. The proposed reaction system was promising in transforming biomass-based carbohydrates into fine chemicals, given the use of green functionalization methods, the utilization of sustainable biomass-derived carbon precursor and solvents, catalyst with high acid density, and the availability of high HMF yield.

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

4.5
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