Muhammad Usmanab,
Abdul Rehman*ab,
Faisal Saleemab,
Aumber Abbasc,
Valentine C. Ezeb and
Adam Harveyb
aDepartment of Chemical and Polymer Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Lahore, Faisalabad Campus, Pakistan. E-mail: a.rehman2@uet.edu.pk
bSchool of Engineering, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
cSongshan Lake Materials Laboratory, University Innovation Park, Dongguan, 523808, China
First published on 26th July 2023
Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions contribute significantly to global warming and deplete fossil carbon resources, prompting a shift to bio-based raw materials. The two main technologies for reducing CO2 emissions are capturing and either storing or utilizing it. However, while capture and storage have high reduction potential, they lack economic feasibility. Conversely, by utilizing the CO2 captured from streams and air to produce valuable products, it can become an asset and curb greenhouse gas effects. CO2 is a challenging C1-building block due to its high kinetic inertness and thermodynamic stability, requiring high temperature and pressure conditions and a reactive catalytic system. Nonetheless, cyclic carbonate production by reacting epoxides and CO2 is a promising green and sustainable chemistry reaction, with enormous potential applications as an electrolyte in lithium-ion batteries, a green solvent, and a monomer in polycarbonate production. This review focuses on the most recent developments in the synthesis of cyclic carbonates from glycerol and bio-based epoxides, as well as efficient methods for chemically transforming CO2 using flow chemistry and novel reactor designs.
Fig. 1 Two isoprene units give monoterpene, the chemical structure of limonene and pinene.1 |
Monoterpenes are volatile and commonly used for flavouring and perfumes due to their strong odour. They are also lipophilic, allowing them to easily penetrate cell membranes, and are known to have antispasmodic properties.2–4 Cannabis contains approximately 200 terpenes, which is only a small fraction of the 20000 terpenes known to exist in plants.5 Among these, limonene and pinene are major terpenes.6 Limonene, a colourless liquid, has a boiling point of 175 °C and is comprised of two isomers: D-limonene and L-limonene. D-limonene is the primary component of essential oils found in citrus fruit rinds, such as oranges, lemons, mandarins, grapefruits, and limes. On the other hand, L-limonene is emitted as a key component of volatile oils by oaks and pines.7 Orange peels contain around 97% of limonene,8 and with around 110 million tons of citrus fruits produced annually, this waste can be a source of essential oil extraction. Various methods, such as solvent extraction, steam distillation, and water distillation extraction, have been employed to extract the oil from orange peels. Steam distillation has been found to produce the maximum yield of oil at 4.40%, followed by water distillation extraction at 3.47% and solvent extraction at 2.53%.9
D-Limonene is widely manufactured globally, with approximately 300 orange oil distillation plants operating worldwide to produce technical-grade (95%) and food-grade (96%) D-limonene from orange oil.7 The market for D-limonene was estimated to be worth USD 473.72 million in 2021, and it is anticipated to increase to USD 694.59 million between 2022 and 2029, increasing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.90%.10 Limonene is mainly used in the flavour and fragrance industry, as a solvent, and for making polymers and adhesives.11 It was first used in 2008 to obtain fats and oils, replacing toxic solvents like n-hexane, effectively eliminating toxicity and environmental impact. D-Limonene is also an excellent cleansing agent, with a high KB (74) and density of 0.84, which allows it to hold a large amount of dirt before becoming ineffective. A compound's KB value is a measure of its ability to hold dirt.7 Additionally, L-limonene and D-limonene are among the 44 sustainable solvents developed by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).12
In Kraft wood pulping, turpentine oil is produced as an energy recovery oil. The increasing demand for chemical products containing artificial flavours, fragrances, and solvents is driving the demand for turpentine oil, which is also a promising alternative fuel for various industrial applications.13 Turpentine oil is currently the primary source of pinene, with an average yield of 0.3–1 kg per tonne of pulp production. Worldwide, the pulping industry produces an estimated 3.5 × 105 Mt per year of turpentine oil, with α-pinene accounting for 70% of the total monoterpene content.14,15 α-Pinene is the dominant form of pinene, found in pine trees and cannabis, and responsible for the characteristic pine scent. The majority of applications use α-pinene. Pine-sol, a cleaning product, contains this terpene. α-Pinene has significant potential as an engine biofuel, as it is comparable to rocket fuel in terms of volumetric heating.16
Glycerol is a versatile chemical that may be processed through numerous paths to creating a variety of products with value-added, such as reforming, dehydration, esterification, selective oxidation, hydrogenolysis, and acetylation.17 However, a direct reaction of glycerol and CO2 is an attractive route that effectively combines two waste products to produce glycerol carbonate. The production of glycerol is a by-product of the biodiesel or green diesel industry, where approximately 10 wt% of glycerol is obtained from every kg of biodiesel, and around 70% of glycerol is produced in this manner.18 The biodiesel market was estimated to be worth USD 40.6 billion in 2021 and is anticipated to increase by 4.4% to USD 52.7 billion by 2027.19 With the expected increase in biodiesel production, there will be a surplus of glycerol that can be utilized as a low-cost chemical feedstock to produce glycerol carbonates and glycerol acetates (also known as acetins). Acetins are non-natural, synthetic products that can be obtained either through traditional chemical conversion or new biological conversion. Chemical conversions involve toxic solvents and reactants (such as acetic acid and acetic anhydride) and require harsh temperature and pressure conditions, making them non-green and polluting. In contrast, biological processes for acetin production are considered green as they use enzymes or microbes as biocatalysts. Acetins have various applications, such as plasticizers, explosives, emulsifiers, food additives, and fuel additives.
Both terpenes and glycerol offer pathways for the conversion of low-value compounds into high-value chemicals with diverse applications. Terpenes, such as limonene, can be coupled with CO2 to produce terpene-based cyclic carbonates, while glycerol can be transformed into glycerol carbonate (GC). Glycerol carbonate (GC) is a liquid with a high water solubility, high boiling point, and low toxicity. It has potential applications as a solvent, as a surfactant, and as an electrolyte in Li-ion batteries.20,21
There are now competitive technologies such as solar and wind that can replace fossil fuels.28 However, renewable energy resources are intermittent, posing a significant concern.29 To reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, efforts are being made to replace fossil fuel-based power plants and synthesis gas generators with biomass-based processes. Nevertheless, bio-based fuel requires being used as a combined mixed fuel due to its low energy density. Thus, conventional power generation may need to be employed to meet peak demands. Moreover, most chemical and fuel production currently rely on fossil fuels as feedstocks, necessitating technologies to reduce negative emissions associated with these processes.30
CCS targets large source points or ambient air to capture a large amount of CO2, while chemical production quantities vary regionally in CCU, limiting the CO2 demand. CCS deployment currently has few economic incentives, while incentives are already provided for CCU to a variety of actors. By minimizing the cost of CO2 capture, CO2 can become an appreciating asset rather than a liability.33 However, it's important to note that CO2 stored in CCS is intended to last more than a thousand years, while CCU stores CO2 in the product only temporarily, which is released at the end of its life cycle back into the atmosphere. CSS is more mature and well-established, while CCU is less familiar and in the early development stages, but the latter is regarded as more positive than the former due to the associated risk of storage and transport with the former technology.34
CSS, which captures and compresses CO2, costs 80% of the total cost associated with the process. Research and development efforts must aim to reduce these costs. Currently, technologies such as pre-combustion, post-combustion, and oxy-fuelling can capture CO2 from cement, steel, iron, and biogas sweetening processes.35 Once captured and separated, CO2 should be transported cost-effectively through pipelines to the injection station. To reduce corrosion and surplus costs, impurities and moisture must be removed. CO2 must be compressed into supercritical form and monitored after injection to prevent it from seeping out and remaining confined.36,37 Long-term sequestration is preferred in active or depleted gas reservoirs and deep aquifers.38 According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), CCS may reduce global CO2 emissions by 17% by 2050 and is one of the least expensive strategies for doing so in the near future.39,40
CO2 is a challenging C1-building block because of its high kinetic inertness and thermodynamic stability, with a standard heat of formation of ΔHf = −394 kJ mol−1 and a standard Gibbs energy of ΔGf = −395 kJ mol−1.41 To react effectively to epoxide and CO2, a catalyst is needed. Metal-containing catalysts can create cyclic carbonate and polycarbonate depending on the nucleophile species, metal species, nucleophile-to-metal ratio, and reaction conditions, but metal-free catalysts are often more selective towards cyclic carbonates. Optimization is necessary to maximize production. Two broad categories of CO2 utilization processes exist physical and chemical. To be physically utilised, CO2 molecules must maintain their identity, either as a distinct entity or suspended in a solution. These processes, which include carbonated drinks, fire extinguishers, dry ice, enhanced oil recovery (EOR), enhanced gas recovery (EGR), and enhanced geothermal systems, are based on the physical properties of CO2. Some physical utilization processes, such as EOR and EGR, have the potential to store large volumes of CO2 and are called sequestration processes.42 Chemical utilization involves CO2 being converted into a new compound. The chemical potential of CO2 can be utilized to produce fuels and chemicals. This article focuses on chemical utilization because of its limitless potential to abate CO2. Several prominent chemical utilization pathways, such as those summarized in Table 1, are available to convert CO2 chemically into useful products, with varying production rates, technology readiness levels (TRL), the specific mass (CO2 utilization in ton per ton of product), and CO2 uptake potential.43–47
Product | Current production (Mt per year) | Technology readiness level (TRL) | Specific mass (CO2 utilization in ton perton of product) | CO2 uptake (MtCO2 per year) | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Urea | 180 | 9 | 0.74 | 132.3 | 43 |
Salicylic acid | 0.17 | 9 | 0.32 | 0.054 | 44 |
Methanol | 65 | 9 | 1.37 | 89.24 | 44 |
Polycarbonate | 5 | 9 | 0.17 | 0.87 | 43 |
Polyurethane | 15 | 9 | 0.30 | 4.5 | 45 |
Ethylene carbonate | 0.2 | 8 | 0.50 | 0.099 | 45 |
Algae | 35 | 7 | 1.8 | 63 | 46 |
Calcium carbonate | 113.9 | 7 | 0.44 | 113.9 | 45 |
Methane | 1100–1500 | 7 | 2.75 | 3050–4150 | 44 |
Propylene carbonate | 0.2 | 7 | 0.43 | 0.086 | 45 |
Syngas | 359 | 6 | 1.47 | 526.55 | 47 |
Sodium carbonate | 62 | 6 | 0.42 | 25.73 | 44 |
Dimethyl carbonate | 1.60 | 5 | 1.47 | 2.35 | 45 |
Magnesium carbonate | 20.50 | 4 | 0.26 | 5.35 | 44 |
Acetic acid | 10.25 | 3 | 0.73 | 7.51 | 44 |
Acrylic acid | 5.85 | 3 | 0.61 | 3.57 | 44 |
Formaldehyde | 21 | 3 | 1.45 | 30.45 | 45 |
Dimethyl ether | 11.4 | 3 | 1.91 | 21.79 | 45 |
Ethanol | 80 | 2 | 1.91 | 152.88 | 44 |
Technologies for producing urea, salicylic acid, methane, methanol, ethylene carbonate, polyurethanes, and polycarbonates have a technology readiness level (TRL) of 9, indicating that they are well-established and mature. Other technologies listed are currently maturing and developing, while some are still immature and in the early stages of development. The CO2 uptake potentials mentioned do not include emissions associated with processing. However, the reduction that can be achieved if environmentally benign processes are developed and deployed for utilization is an overview of the overall reduction. Currently, approximately 220 Mt per year of CO2 is utilized for producing different chemicals, excluding methane, syngas, calcium carbonate, sodium carbonate, ethanol, etc. Urea production consumes the majority of CO2, followed by salicylic acid, cyclic carbonate, and polycarbonate. The remaining CO2 is used for methanol, ethanol, etc. Additionally, around 20 Mt per year of its usage as a technical fluid must be added to this amount. It is estimated that today, the chemical industry consumes 92% of the approximately 240 Mt per year of CO2 that is consumed.48
Over the next decade, a growing synthetic technology industry may increase the rate at which CO2 is utilized to 350 Mt per year. By 2040, we could see a surge in the consumption of CO2 for chemicals, rising to around 1000 Mt per year, potentially making a considerable difference.49
Scheme 1 Synthesis of urea (reproduced from ref. 26 with permission from Wiley-VCH copyright 2021). |
Salicylic acid synthesis is a second example of efficient CO2 utilisation (Scheme 2).52 The commercialization of this process dates back to the 19th century, and salicylic acid production currently consumes 29 Kt of CO2 directly, with a total production of 90 Kt per year.27,53
Scheme 2 Synthesis of salicylic acid (reproduced from ref. 26 with permission from Wiley-VCH copyright 2021). |
The production of carbon-neutral fuels like methanol and methane is the third efficient chemical use of CO2 (Scheme 3).54,55 These fuels have zero CO2 emissions when combusted under certain conditions, and their potential scale is almost limitless, as they can replace liquid and gaseous fossil fuels. Methane and methanol production has the potential to reduce 2.75 and 1.373 tons of CO2 per ton of product produced, respectively.44 Hydrogen is the main reactant needed for the feasibility of methanol and methane production, and methane can also be used for the production of carbon black and rubber.56
Scheme 3 Synthesis of methanol and methane using CO2 and hydrogen (reproduced from ref. 26 with permission from Wiley-VCH copyright 2021). |
The production of polycarbonates is the fourth illustration of efficient CO2 utilisation, which uses renewable, economical, and non-toxic CO2 instead of the poisonous phosgene route (Scheme 4).57,58 Similarly, the fifth example of effective CO2 utilization is the production of polyurethanes (PU),59 which have dominated coatings, adhesives, sealants, and elastomers for the past three to four decades and can be tailored for different applications (Scheme 4).60–62 The current production rate of polycarbonates and polyurethanes is 5 and 15 Mt per year, respectively.45,47
Scheme 4 Synthesis of cyclic carbonates from epoxide and CO2.32 |
Other developing CO2 utilization technologies include dimethyl carbonate (DMC), dimethyl ether (DME), ethanol and algae. Ethanol is produced conventionally by fermenting sugars or corn, and it has the potential to be used as a zero-emission fuel, but the process design and low catalyst activity remain challenges.61,62 DME is an alternative green fuel that results in fewer GHGs and can coproduce electricity, while DMC has potential as a methylating agent but faces catalyst selection issues (Table 1).63,64 Algae cultivation has great potential as a biomass source for green fuel production and can absorb CO2 and convert it to oxygen for water purification.65 Fig. 2 shows examples of mature CO2 utilization technologies and applications of cyclic carbonates.
Fig. 2 Examples of effective utilization of CO2 and applications of cyclic carbonates.26 |
Cyclic carbonates are considered green solvents, with propylene carbonate (PC), ethylene carbonate (EC), and glycerol carbonate (GC) being the most widely used (Fig. 3.).66 The physiochemical properties of cyclic carbonates are listed in Table 2.66–73 EC and PC are the most commonly used globally.74,75
Fig. 3 Cyclic carbonates: (a) propylene carbonate (PC), (b) ethylene carbonate (EC), (c) glycerol carbonate (GC).66 |
Cyclic carbonates | Propylene carbonate (PC) | Ethylene carbonate (EC) | Glycerol carbonate (GC) |
---|---|---|---|
Formula | C4H6O3 | C4H6O3 | C4H6O3 |
CAS number | 108-32-7 | 96-49-1 | 931-40-8 |
IUPAC name | 4-Methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-one | 1,3-Dioxolan-2-one | 4-Hydroxymethyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-one |
Molecular mass, [g mol−1] | 102 | 88 | 118 |
Specific gravity [g cm−3] | 1.20 (20 °C) | 1.32 (40 °C) | 1.40 (25 °C) |
Boiling point, Tb (°C) | 242 | 248 | 354 |
Freezing point, Tf (°C) | −49 | 36 | −69 |
Flash point (°C) | 135 | 145 | >204 |
Vapour pressure [kPa] | 0.131 (50 °C) | 0.003 (25 °C) | n.a |
Viscosity, (cP or mPa s at 25 °C) | 2.53 | 1.93 | 85.40 |
Solubility (at 20 °C) (mg kg−1) | Very soluble | Soluble | Miscible |
Hazards | Induces severe eye irritation | A prolonged or repeated exposure can cause serious eye irritation, and cause injury to the kidneys if swallowed | Ingestion or skin absorption can be harmful |
Due to their dielectric characteristics, cyclic carbonates make excellent electrolytes for Li-ion batteries.79 Li-ion batteries have become popular due to their use in portable devices.80 Among Li-based battery electrolytes, EC and PC are commonly used as solvents. Lithium salts can dissolve in cyclic carbonate, providing the high dielectric constant needed for conductive electrolytes.25 PC and EC have various uses such as cleaning, paint stripping, degreasing, and the production of paints and coatings, lubricants, dyes, cosmetics, and personal care products.74,75 Cyclic carbonates can also be employed as monomers in the production of polymers like polycarbonate and polyurethanes without isocyanate.59,81 Cyclic carbonates are more effective than urea or salicylic acid at sequestering CO2 in electronic devices, which typically have a lifespan measured in years. Electric cars may have a lifespan of decades, making cyclic carbonates even more effective at sequestering CO2.26 Fig. 4 represents the applications of cyclic carbonates.
Fig. 4 Applications of cyclic carbonates.32 |
Fig. 5 Structure of both (R)-(+)-limonene enantiomers, oxidation to afford limonene-based oxides and reaction with CO2 to obtain corresponding cyclic carbonates, reproduced from (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Extensive studies have been conducted on 1,2-LO due to its wide availability. However, when comparing sterically demanding 1,2-LO with other epoxides, the former exhibits lower reactivity during coupling. As a result, a longer reaction time (16–66 h) is required at higher temperatures and pressures (75–100 °C, 10–50 bar). Fig. 6 summarises metal-based catalytic systems that have been reported for the coupling of 1,2-LO and CO2.83–87
Fig. 6 A metal-based catalytic system reported for the synthesis of 1,2-LC, along with comparisons of the reaction conditions and chemistry of the products (n.d. = no determination) (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Several catalyst systems, including 1, 2tBu, and 3, have been reported to selectively form trans-1,2-LC, leading to different reactivity between the cis and trans isomers of 1,2-LO.83,84,86 In 2016, efficient conversion of various terpene-based substrates was achieved using 2R/PPNCL, which produced LDO with good yield. However, the synthesis of LDC was unsuccessful due to the formation of polyether (PE) side products. The reaction conditions for LDO synthesis were 1.0 mol% 2R, 3.0 mol% PPNCL, 1.0 mL MEK, 66 h, 85 °C, p(CO2) = 1 MPa.84 Another study reported the formation of LDC with a concentration of up to 78% in the presence of 10.0 mol% 5/2.0 mol% PPh3 catalyst, after 48 h at 75 °C and 50 bar.85
Tetrabutylammonium halide (TBAX) is an efficient and effective catalyst for synthesizing 5-ring cyclic carbonates.88 Therefore, a similar reaction was carried out using TBAX as a catalyst for the reaction between 1,2-LO and CO2 with the substrate being ct-LO [43:57].89 The reaction conditions were extreme with high temperature, pressure, and reaction time (100 °C, 3 MPa, 20 h) and the catalyst consisted of 10 mol% ct-LO without any solvent. Tetrabutylammonium chloride (TBAC) had a 51% conversion rate of cis–trans-LO, with the individual conversion of trans-LO and cis-LO being 76% and 19%, respectively. However, the conversion rate and NMR yield decreased when tetrabutylammonium bromide (TBAB) and tetrabutylammonium iodide (TBAI) were used as activating catalysts. The order of catalytic activity increment was reported as TBAX > TBAB > TBAI < TBAC.
The research group continued their investigation using TBAC as the catalyst model to study the effect of reaction conditions. The typical conditions used were a 10 mol% catalyst based on cis–trans-LO, 20 h reaction time, 100 °C temperature, and 3 MPa of CO2 pressure. The study focused on varying reaction times, CO2 pressure, and the amount of TBAC. Prolonging the reaction time did not improve the conversion of cis–trans-LO, as 48 h and 72 h resulted in 65% and 69% yields, respectively. The next step was to vary the CO2 pressure while keeping all other parameters constant. The results showed that only increasing the pressure by 5 MPa increased the individual yield/conversion to cis-LO/trans-LO to 27:85. Finally, increasing the amount of TBAC increased trans-LO yield, while cis-LO conversion remained low.
A detailed kinetic study of the coupling reaction between 1,2-LO and CO2 in the presence of TBAC was recently reported, which found that the trans-isomer exhibits greater reactivity. The reaction was determined to be a first-order reaction with respect to all reactants, and the Eyring equation was used to determine the thermodynamic parameters of conversion. The entropy value was found to be 60.6 kJ mol−1 and the enthalpy value was −103.6 J (mol K)−1.90 In another recent study by Mikšovsky et al.,91 tetrabutylammonium-based halides and 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium halides were used as homogeneous catalysts, while a supported ionic liquid was used as a heterogeneous catalyst for the synthesis of cyclic carbonates from limonene epoxides. It was found that imidazolium-based liquids have less catalytic activity in comparison or are even inactive when LO (cis/trans-mixture) is used as a substrate. TBAC proved to be the most selective and highest-yielding catalyst for converting the diastereomeric mixture (cis/trans = 44/56). Silica without immobilization, TBAC, and TBAB showed lower yield, while in the case of imidazolium-based catalysts TBAI yield increased, but the overall selectivity was still low. The same order of catalytic activity was seen for supported ionic liquid phases and ammonium-based ionic liquids (ILs) physisorbed on silica as it was for homogeneous mode.
Mülhaupt's research group used LDC to prepare poly-hydroxy urethanes (Scheme 5).92 For the synthesis of LDC on a one-kilogram scale, TBAB was used, and the reaction parameters were optimized to allow for 3 mol% TBAB usage in less than 50 h to achieve complete LDO conversion. The resulting product was a brownish oil, which can be directly used to prepare non-isocyanate polyurethanes (NIPUs). Several by-products were identified after analyzing the reaction. LDC was cooled and crystallised to create a pure product, resulting in a 3:1 combination (cis-to-trans ratio). X-ray analysis proved that the trans-LDC produced by further crystallisation was 100% pure.93
Scheme 5 Formation of limonene di-carbonate (LDC) by the reaction of limonene di-oxide (LDO) and CO2 catalyzed by TBAB and subsequent crystallization to obtain trans-LDC (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Through TBAB-mediated reaction, 8,9-LC was formed by reacting CO2 with 8,9-LO. To synthesize the desired carbonates, the less hindered terminal alkene of (R)-(+)-limonene was selectively epoxidized (Scheme 6). Perchloric acid was used as the oxidant, and bulky polyoxometalates (POM) were used as the catalyst. Compared to 1,2-LO, 8,9-LC is easier to produce due to less steric hindrance, reaching maximum conversion in only 2.5 h under comparable reaction conditions. Additionally, the two diastereomer-isomers obtained showed the same reactivity during coupling with CO2, which is in contrast to 1,2-LO, where trans-1,2-LO was found to be more reactive.94
Scheme 6 Highly selective (R)-(+)-limonene epoxidation to obtain 8,9-limonene oxide (8,9-LO) and subsequent reaction with CO2 to obtain 8,9-LC by TBAB-catalysed reaction (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Scheme 7 Glycerol carbonate (GC) obtained from glycerol and CO2 (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Vieville et al. reported the first attempt to synthesise GC from glycerol and CO2 in 1998.96 The reaction did not occur under supercritical CO2 conditions. The first successful production of GC was reported by Aresta et al. in 2006 using Sn-based catalysts under 5 MPa and 180 °C of pressure and temperature, respectively.97 A maximum yield of 5.7% was achieved without the use of a solvent, and molecular sieves were used for the removal of in situ water. During the mechanistic study, it was proposed that the Sn-based catalyst and CO2 could be inserted into glycerol by forming the active Sn-glycerate intermediate. George et al. intensified this process in 2009 using MeOH as a medium, increasing the yield of GC to 35%, as shown in Scheme 8.98 Methanol acted as a solvent and was involved in the reaction mechanism as well. Metal oxide/complexes, supported metal catalysts, modified zeolites, or hydrotalcite have been reported as catalytic systems. For GC synthesis, most heterogeneous catalysts require CO2 at high pressures and temperatures above 40 bar and 150 °C, respectively.
Scheme 8 Improved carbonation of glycerol using MeOH as solvent.98 |
The dehydrating reagent for the removal of water was more efficacious than using molecular sieves. However, in some cases, a decrease in chemo selectivity towards GC was noted. The most used dehydrating agents for this reaction are acetonitrile, adiponitrile, and 2-cyanopyridine, as shown in Scheme 10. In most studies, acetonitrile is the first choice because it is cheap, but upon reaction with the water molecule, it generates acetamide in situ. The produced acetamide reacts with another water molecule to produce acetic acid, which decreases selectivity by forming mono- and di-acetins. McGregor et al.18 used adiponitrile as a dehydrating agent to remove water and found that it degrades to ammonia upon reacting with glycerol, resulting in a mixture of two regio-isomers of 4-HMO (4-(hydroxymethyl)oxazolidine-2-one). In 2016, Liu et al.99 employed 2-cyanopyridine as a highly effective dehydrating reagent. By using 3 equivalents of 2-cyanopyridine with a CeO2 catalyst in DMF at 4 MPa of CO2 and 150 °C, GC yields can increase to 79%. Recent research by Zhang et al.100 has shown the benefits of employing CaC2 as a dehydration agent for GC production. In their work, CaC2 was combined with Zn(OTf)2/phen (1,10-phenanthroline) in N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), and the reaction was carried out at 50 bar CO2 pressure at 180 °C for 24 h to get 88% GC. In their experiment, CaC2 in combination with Zn(OTf)2/phen (1,10-phenanthroline) in NMP (N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone) at 50 bar CO2 pressure and 180 °C for 24 h yielded 88% GC. Su et al.101 reported a year later that GC can also be produced using 2-cyanopyridine at 15 MPa of CO2 and 180 °C without the use of a metal catalyst, with a 19% yield (Scheme 9). FTIR analysis confirmed the formation of a 5-membered ring via the activation of CO2 by 2-cyanopyridine, followed by a reaction with glycerol to form GC. The formation of this heterocycle was also supported by theoretical analysis, and glycerol was subsequently transesterified by it. Notably, there was no substantial GC production when using acetonitrile, 4-cyanopyridine, or 3-cyanopyridine (Table 3).
Scheme 9 Metal-free formation of GC using 2-cyanopyridine (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Scheme 10 Comparison of different dehydrating agents in the formation of GC from glycerol and CO2 (ref. 18, 21, 99 and 100) (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
System | Catalyst | Dehydrating agent | Pressure (MPa) | T (°C) | Time req. | Yielda/conversionb | Other reported | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a Yield.b Conversion. | ||||||||
Homogeneous | n-Bu2Sn (OMe)2 | Molecular sieves | 5 | 180 | 5.7a | No solvent | 97 | |
Homogeneous | nBu2SnO | 13X-soda zeolites | 3.5 | 80 | 4 h | 35a | MeOH as medium | 98 |
Heterogeneous | La2O3 | Adiponitrile | 4.5 | 160 | 18 h | 58b | 18 | |
Heterogeneous | CeO2 | 2-Cyanopyridine | 4 | 150 | 33.3a/38b | 99 | ||
Heterogeneous | Zn (OTf)2/phen (1,10-phenanthroline) | CaC2 | 50 bars | 180 | 24 h | 88a | In NMP (N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone) | 100 |
Metal-free | No | 2-Cyanopyridine | 15 | 180 | 18.7a/31.1b | 101 |
Scheme 11 General reaction of glycerol with CO2 in the presence of a coupling agent, reproduced from (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
System | Catalyst | Coupling agents | P (MPa) | T (°C) | Time req. | Yield% | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heterogeneous | KI | 2.0 | 115 | 1.5 h | 77 | 102 | |
Heterogeneous | P-DVB-(vIm-BuBr) | 2.0 | 100 | 4 h | 81 | 103 | |
Heterogeneous | Ag2CO3/xanthophores | 1.0 | 80 | 12 h | 82 | 104 | |
Heterogeneous | Silver sulfadiazine and Et4NBr | 0.1 | 80 | 24 h | 56 | 105 | |
Heterogeneous | Amidine-CO2 adduct/MTBD | 0.1 | 25 | 24 h | 85 | 106 | |
Heterogeneous | DBU (8-diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene), DMF | 3.0 | 120 | 10 h | 97 | 107 | |
Heterogeneous | DBU (8-diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene), BmimPF6 | CH2Br2 | 1.0 | 70 | 18 h | 86 | 108 |
Heterogeneous | Guanidine catalyst | n-BuBr | 0.1 | 50 | 4 h | 74 | 109 |
Propargylic alcohol (dimethyl ethynyl carbinol) has been used as a coupling reagent along with PO. He et al.104 utilized Ag2CO3/xanthaphos catalyst in MeCN with 1 MPa CO2 pressure at 80 °C to produce a good yield of GC in one pot approach using CH3CN as a solvent (entry 3, Table 4). Li et al.105 improved the process by using silver sulfadiazine and the Et4NBr synergistic system without any solvent (entry 4, Table 4), but the yield of GC decreased. Silver sulfadiazine activated the hydroxyl groups simultaneously in propargylic alcohols (or vicinal diols), resulting in an excellent performance. The Lu and Liu groups reported GC preparation by organo-catalytic approach. Zhou et al.106 used N-hetrocyclic carbene-CO2 adducts which formed an intermediate and further transesterification took place with glycerol catalyzed by MTBD (methyl-1,5,7-triazabicyclo [4.4.0] dec-5-ene) to achieve an 85% yield of GC at room temperature and 0.1 MPa (entry 5, Table 4). Han et al.107 reported a three-component reaction using DBU (8-diazabicyclo [5.4.0] under-7-ene) to promote both steps, resulting in 97% yield of GC at 120 °C and 3 MPa in 10 h (entry 6, Table 4). Alkyl halides can also be used as effective reactants, but they generate halogen-containing waste, making the method unsustainable. Jang et al.108 reported the use of DBU, BmimPF6, and CH2Br2 for direct coupling of various alcohols, including glycerol, without using any Mitsunobu-type reagents (entry 7, Table 4). At 70 °C and 1 MPa, it was possible to achieve 86% yield. Mihara et al.109 used tert-butyl tetramethyl guanidine and n-BuBr as an additional component at 50 °C and 0.1 MPa CO2 pressure employing NMP (N-methyl pyrrolidone) as a solvent to obtain GC in 74% yield (entry 8, Table 4). The authors suggest that the ionic liquid is effective in improving CO2 solubility, glycidol (Gly) may react with an NHC carbene formed that can capture/activate CO2.
Rintjema et al.112 discovered that the hydroxyl group on Gly, which can be used to create transitory hemi-carbonate species, can be used to activate CO2. Halide-free processing is made possible by this activation, which causes the oxirane ring to be opened by an intramolecular nucleophile under mild conditions and without the requirement for an external nucleophilic addition. It has been determined the exact process by which the oxirane ring of Gly is opened intramolecularly by the production of hemi-carbonate. Additionally, metal and halide-free production of GC using a packed bed reactor under flow conditions has been reported.113 Several catalytical systems, including heterogeneous, homogenous, and organo-metallic, have been reported to produce GC from Gly. However, not all catalytic systems are superior to simple TBAB.
Scheme 12 Highly efficient heterogeneous catalysts for the synthesis of GC from Gly,120–123 (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Multifunctional components integrated into composite materials can enhance the activity for specific uses. Jiang et al.120 reported an efficient composite catalyst, polyILs@MIL-101, by confining imidazolium-based polyionic liquids (polyILs) into a metal–organic framework (MOF) material MIL-101 via in situ polymerizations of encapsulated monomers. This material has CO2-capturing capability and is a good catalyst without any co-catalyst under normal atmospheric pressure. With high surface area and hierarchical pores, PolyILs@MIL-101 is a promising catalyst material. The superior catalytic activity of polyILs@MIL-101, in comparison to either polyILs or MIL-101, is due to the synergy between the CO2 capturing capability, the Lewis base site in polyILs, and the Lewis acid site in the MOF. Only a few reports have explored the synergistic effects of CO2 capture and conversion. The results of this study demonstrate the necessity of enriching CO2 using a heterogeneous catalyst to assist in its conversion. Moreover, this paper proposes a strategy for designing practical catalysts that could be used in the future to directly capture and convert CO2 from flue gases.
Ghosh et al.121 reported using iron-phosphonate hybrid organic–inorganic nanoparticles HPFP-1(NP) as a nano-catalyst for synthesizing organic carbonate at mild conditions and CO2 under atmospheric pressure. This catalyst demonstrated excellent recyclability and reusability. In addition, a polystyrene–zinc–anthra complex was found to be an efficient catalyst, achieving 89% conversion to GC in 5 h.122 While both HPFP and PS-Zn require TBAB as a co-catalyst, zinc stannate nanocrystals do not need any co-catalyst. These nanocrystals could also be recovered and reused without losing their activity in the presence of PEG-600 as a green solvent, showing the potential of nano-catalysts as an environmentally friendly solution.123 The summary of the homogenous catalytical system reported for GC production from Gly is given in Table 5.
Catalyst | Pressure | Temperature (°C) | Time req. | Conversiona/yieldb | Other reported | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a Conversion.b Yield. | ||||||
PolyILs@MIL-101 | 1.5 bar | 70 | 24 h | >99%a | 2 mL acetonitrile | 120 |
PS-Zn-anthra complex | 1 atm | 25 | 4 h | 89%b | Bu4NBr, TON/TOF = 141/28 | 122 |
Zinc-stannate nanocrystals | 1 atm | 80 | 10 h | 91%b | PEG-600 as a green solvent | 123 |
Scheme 13 Synthesis of GC from Gly using highly effective homogeneous catalysts83,124–129 (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Catalyst | Loading | Pressure (MPa) | Temperature (°C) | Time Req. | Co-catalyst | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aluminium scorpionate complexes | 0.25–0.5 mol% | — | 70–85 | — | No co-catalyst | 124–126 |
Bifunctional zinc salen-like complex | 0.3 mol% | 0.1 | 100 | — | No co-catalyst | 127 |
Bimetallic aluminium salen complexes | — | 0.1 | 27 | 3 h | No co-catalyst | 128 |
Heteroscorpionate lanthanum complex | 0.05 mol% | 1.0 | 70 | 4 h | Catalytic amount of halide as co-catalyst | 83 |
Bimetallic helical aluminium complex | 0.5 mol% | 1.0 | 50 | 8 h | Catalytic amount of halide as co-catalyst | 129 |
Scheme 14 Efficient organo catalysts reported for the conversion of Gly into GC130–135 (reproduced from ref. 82 with permission from RSC copyright 2021). |
Sopeña et al.135 concluded that DBU can enhance GC production from Gly and other epoxy alcohols by creating Hemi-carbonate intermediates in mild conditions. Furthermore, a new organocatalytic process has been discovered to couple tri- and tetra-substituted epoxides with CO2, allowing for the synthesis of cyclic carbonates previously difficult to produce under mild reaction conditions. This discovery is advantageous for industrial applications. By controlling the substrate conversion of CO2, new heterocyclic scaffolds can be created with enhanced synthetic potential.
Although flow chemistry offers several advantages for CO2 transformation, its application is still a challenge. The low reactivity of CO2 makes many batch reactions slow, and different flow patterns can occur due to the reactor geometry and operating conditions.152 These patterns, such as annular flow, bubble flow, slug flow and churn flow, directly affect the experimental results. Thus, continuous processes require different operating parameters than batch processes, which must be adjusted accordingly. Additionally, CO2 fixation under flow conditions poses other challenges, such as product separation, catalyst recycling, and solvent and/or waste compatibility during multistep reactions. Innovative approaches have been reported to solve these issues, but further developments are necessary, including the development of new concepts, more efficient catalysts, and novel equipment. Process intensification has exciting possibilities and flow chemistry should be viewed as a complement to batch chemistry rather than as its competitor. Research and development efforts are needed for commercialization, and high-potential applications of process intensification include biological CO2 transformation, catalytic CO2 transformation, electrochemical CO2 transformation, and CO2 transformation using plasma technology.153 These advancements can significantly reduce the feasibility gap between newly developed sustainable technologies and previous technologies. Flow platforms are commonly equipped with the equipment listed in Fig. 7.
Fig. 7 The schematic diagram for the representation of reaction equipment (reproduced from ref. 154 with permission from Wiley-VCH Verlag copyright 2021). |
Ionic liquids have become a popular catalysis method in recent years due to their stability, non-flammability, recyclability, and tailoring ease.137,155 The cycloaddition of CO2 and propylene oxide (PO) to create PC was reported on by Takahashi et al. in 2006.156 They used a packed-bed reactor with an effective organic–inorganic hybrid catalyst. Compared to homogeneously used onium-salts, immobilized phosphonium-halides increased catalytic activity significantly. The inorganic-acid support also synergistically enhanced the organic component (Fig. 8). SiO2–C3H6–P (n-Bu)3 I had a pseudo-first-order rate constant 300 times greater than P (n-Bu)4I, normalized to phosphorus atoms. The fixed bed flow reactor used 10 g of SiO2–C3H6–P(n-Bu)3Br as a catalyst, with CO2 and PO flow rates of 0.1 and 0.2 mL min−1, respectively. Under 10 MPa, the temperature increased from 90 to 160 °C, yielding 80% in over 1000 h with 99% selectivity. One phosphonium group can produce more than 11500 molecules of PC. Using packed-bed reactors and supported catalysts, this ground-breaking study found that the cycloaddition of CO2 to PC could be accomplished with remarkable efficiency.
Fig. 8 The catalytic coupling between Propylene oxide and CO2 catalysed by SiO2–C3H6–P(n-Bu)3Br (reproduced from ref. 156 with permission from RSC copyright 2017). |
Zhang et al.157 examined the utilisation of a packed-bed reactor for the cycloaddition of epichlorohydrin in 2015. They used coconut shell activated carbon (CSAC) anchored ionic liquids as a catalyst and no solvent (Fig. 9). The epichlorohydrin flowrate was maintained at 1.0 mL min−1 and the CO2 flowrate at 50 mL min−1. The reaction was carried out at 1.4 MPa and 140 °C, resulting in an 82% yield in 5 h, with a liquid hourly space velocity (LHSV) of 6 h−1.
Fig. 9 The catalytic coupling of epoxide and CO2 using coconut shell activated carbon (CSAC) tethered ionic liquid as a catalyst.157 |
In 2017, Wang et al.158 utilized a fixed-bed reactor to perform the cycloaddition of CO2 to PO to PC using newly synthesized PSIL(IMD) Imidazolium-based polymer-supported ionic liquids as a catalyst, without the use of a solvent. A total of 0.3 g of the catalyst was used in the experiment (Fig. 10). The gas hourly space velocity (GHSV) of the PO was kept constant at 4000 h−1 while the flow rate was kept at 15 μL min−1, under a 2 MPa pressure. With a liquid hourly space velocity (LHSV) of 6 h−1, a yield of 41 to 45% was attained in 130 hours. This system demonstrated good activity and was a significant milestone in the field.
Fig. 10 The catalytic coupling between Propylene oxide and CO2 catalysed by Polymer supported ionic liquid (PSIL) (reproduced from ref. 158 with permission from RSC copyright 2017). |
For CO2 cycloaddition to epoxides in a continuous flow reactor, Valverde et al.159 looked into the use of multifunctional polymers based on ionic liquids and Rose Bengal (RB) fragments (Fig. 11). A highly effective catalyst was produced under flow conditions by modifying the RB characteristics by changing the chemical nature of the supporting liquid. The substrate and CO2 flowed at rates of 5 and 50 μL min−1, respectively. At 140 bar and 150 °C, the system achieved 53% conversion over 10 days, with no leaching and no decrease in catalytic activity.
Fig. 11 The catalytic coupling between styrene oxide and CO2 catalysed by Rose Bengal (RB) based polymer (reproduced from ref. 159 with permission from ACS, copyright 2021). |
In 2021, Yin et al.160 investigated the use of a green DBU-based IL catalyst (DBU@SBA) for CO2 fixation and PC synthesis in a new packed bed reactor design (Fig. 12). The reactor had a substrate flow rate of 0.1 mL min−1 and CO2 flowrate of 5 mL min−1. At 2 MPa and 90 °C, the reaction was conducted, yielding 57.1% conversion after 2 h and 16.86% after 24 h of continuous operation. However, the catalytic activity was lost after 26 h, resulting in only a 4% yield.
Fig. 12 The coupling of propylene oxide with CO2 catalysed by DBU@SBA-15 (reproduced from ref. 160 with permission from Elsevier copyright 2021). |
Bui et al.161 reported the use of a vertical-fixed bed reactor for the cycloaddition of CO2 to epichlorohydrin and 1,2 butylene oxide using economical Mesoporous melamine-formaldehyde resins (MMFR) as a heterogeneous catalyst (Fig. 13).
Fig. 13 Mesoporous melamine-formaldehyde resins (MFFR) catalysed epoxide-CO2 coupling (reproduced from ref. 161 with permission from ACS, copyright 2020). |
Fig. 14 2-Hydroxyl-ethyl-tributyl ammonium bromide (HETBAB) catalysed reaction in micro reaction system including micromixer and capillary reactor (reproduced from ref. 136 with permission from RSC copyright 2013). |
Li et al.164 reported the use of a microreactor followed by a delayed reactor for the cycloaddition of CO2 to various epoxides using a binary catalytic system (Fig. 15). The flowrate of epoxide and CO2 was maintained at 0.3–1.2 mL min−1 and 195.2–770 mL min−1, respectively, achieving 90 to 99% conversion in less than 100 seconds with TOF ranging from 6800 to 14700 under 2.0 MPa and 150 °C. Compared to a conventional stirred reactor, the microreactor reaction exhibited significantly higher TOF values, a higher and stable reaction rate, and negligible effect by the CO2/epoxide molar ratio. Furthermore, the “Electrophile–Nucleophile” synergistic effect in the microreactor could be enhanced to further improve the catalytic activity.
Fig. 15 Coupling reaction of CO2 in the presence of (Salen) AlCl (reproduced from ref. 164 with permission from RSC copyright 2018). |
In 2021, Wu et al. 138 stated the use of a micro reaction system in a continuous flow setup for CO2 fixation, using 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium bromide ([BMIM]Br) and H2O as catalyst and co-catalyst, respectively (Fig. 16). At 3 MPa and 140 °C, they achieved 90 to 99.8% conversion with a residence time of just 166 seconds. The molar ratio of [BMIM]Br/H2O/PO was set at 0.14/0.25/1, and the CO2/PO molar ratio was 1.4. Additionally, the recycling performance of [BMIM]Br catalyst was examined, yielding over 86% even after being recycled and repurposed 5 times without losing selectivity.
Fig. 16 Propylene oxide and CO2 coupling are coupled by [BMIM]Br (reproduced from ref. 138 with permission from Elsevier copyright 2021). |
In 2021, Rigo et al.165 used a micro-fluidic reactor to perform cycloaddition to epoxides with a binary system NaBr/diethylene glycol (DEG) as a catalytic system, using DEG as a reaction medium (Fig. 17). The flow rate of epoxide and CO2 was kept at 0.1 mL min−1 and 1.0 mL min−1, respectively. At 120 bar and 220 °C, they obtained a conversion of 91 to 99% for a range of cyclic carbonates.
Fig. 17 Propylene oxide and CO2 are coupled using diethylene glycol/NaBr system catalysis (reproduced from ref. 165 with permission from Wiley-VCH copyright 2021). |
Tube-in-tube reactors are gaining attention as an intelligent process for gas–liquid transformations. In 2018, Rehman et al.166 studied the CO2 cycloaddition of styrene oxide (SO) using a ZnBr2/TBAB catalytic system in a gas–liquid continuous flow reactor of this type. They achieved 100% conversion at 6 bar and 120 °C in 45 min (Fig. 18). The kinetic study showed that it was a first-order reaction with respect to the reactants. The decrease of activation energy by 23 kJ mol−1 using ZnBr2 as a co-catalyst highlighted the importance of synergy.
Fig. 18 Styrene oxide and CO2 coupling using a synergistic system of ZnBr2/TBAB (reproduced from ref. 166 with permission from Elsevier, copyright 2018). |
In 2021, Zanda et al.113 used a tube-in-tube reactor followed by a packed bed reactor in series for the preparation of GC from Gly. They used 1.59 g of heterogeneous TBD @ Merrifield as a catalyst and MEK as a solvent (Fig. 19). In 48 h, 99% conversion was attained while the reaction was being conducted at 70 °C and 3 bar of CO2 pressure.
Fig. 19 Coupling reaction in a tube-in-tube reactor using TBD@Merrifield as a catalyst (reproduced from ref. 113 with permission ACS from copyright 2021). |
The setup for continuous flow reaction is shown in Fig. 20. Both scCO2 and substrate were mixed and sent to the preheater when a temperature greater than 80 °C was required, followed by a second heating unit to heat the catalyst cartridge to 150 °C. The catalyst input for two different cartridge lengths (150 and 250 mm) was 1.34 and 2.22 g of SILP material, respectively. Back-pressure regulators were used to enabling reactions to occur at different pressures. The final product was collected after passing through a gas–liquid separator, containing carbonates and unreacted starting material. Optimization was performed on the temperature, pressure, catalyst loading, and flow rates of CO2 and substrates. The reaction required a 2–3 h preliminary lead time under the low flow rate of 1,2-LO of 0.01 mL min−1. The SILP catalysts used were easily producible heterogeneous and best-performing supported ionic liquid phase (SILP) catalysts (Fig. 21).
Fig. 20 Supported Ionic liquid (SLIP) catalysed heterogeneous reaction of limonene oxide and CO2 (reproduced from ref. 91 with permission from ACS, copyright 2022). |
Fig. 21 Catalysts: ammonium- and imidazolium-based ionic liquids were used as homogeneous catalysts, and SILPs were applied as heterogeneous catalysts for flow synthesis (reproduced from ref. 91 with permission from ACS, copyright 2022). |
Various factors were studied to optimize the continuous flow process for the conversion of 1,2-LO and LDO to limonene cyclic carbonates. Firstly, an increase in temperature from 80 to 120 °C increased yield. However, at 150 °C, both degradation and Hoffmann elimination of TBAC 1 to tributylamine caused a decline in yield over time. Secondly, to prevent the leaching of the catalyst from its supporting material during prolonged industrial use, the corresponding pressure of 6 to 20 MPa was studied at 120 °C. It was observed that 12% leaching occurred at 6 MPa, while no leaching was observed at 15 and 20 MPa. However, at 20 MPa, product formation declined. Thirdly, a catalyst cartridge of 250 mm (residence time of 125 s) was used instead of 150 mm (residence time of 75 s), and the increased input of SILP to 2.22 g resulted in a 60% yield increment. Fourthly, catalyst loading of 20 to 40 wt% was studied, and it was found that a 30 wt% loading instead of 20 wt% increased the yield, while a 40 wt% loading was unsuitable and overburdened the pressure. Lastly, the flow rates of scCO2 and substrate (LO-cis/trans) were studied. The flow rate of CO2 between 1.99 and 2.49 mL min−1 was found to be optimum, while a flow rate of 0.99 mL min−1 caused choking and a flow rate of 3.99 mL min−1 caused leaching. Similarly, a higher flow rate of (LO-cis/trans) 0.02 L min−1 instead of 0.01 mL min−1 resulted in leaching.
Using a heterogeneous catalyst optimized under specific conditions (48 h reaction time, 15 MPa pressure, 120 °C temperature, 2.22 g of SLIP 1 catalyst input, 0.01 mL min−1 of LO-cis/trans substrate flow rate, 1.99 mL min−1 of CO2 flow rate, and a 250 mm catalyst cartridge), a maximum yield of 22% and an overall yield of 16% were achieved. This resulted in a novel production flow rate of 0.12 g h−1, which had not been reported before. To further optimize the process, future experiments could focus on using only the more reactive cis isomer for the chemical fixation of CO2 under flow conditions.
Diastereomeric mixtures of epoxy carbonate and bicarbonate can be formed by converting LDO, as shown in Fig. 22. Epoxy carbonate, being less sterically hindered, yields higher yields than bicarbonate. To optimize the reaction, a heterogeneous catalyst was used under specific conditions (12 h, 20 MPa, 120 °C, 2.22 g of SLIP 1, 0.01 mL min−1 of LO-cis/trans, 1.99 mL min−1 of CO2, 250 mm catalyst cartridge), resulting in a maximum yield of 27% for epoxy carbonate and 14% for bicarbonate, with an overall yield of 16%. Table 7 provides a summary of cyclic carbonates synthesis under flow conditions, showcasing the various types of reactors and their respective reaction conditions.
Fig. 22 Supported Ionic liquid (SLIP) catalysed heterogeneous reaction of LDO and CO2 (reproduced from ref. 91 with permission from ACS, copyright 2022). |
Substrate/epoxide | Epoxide flow rate | CO2 flow rate | Reactor type | Reaction/reactor conditions (T, P) | Catalyst req. | Conversion + time | Selectivity | Other reported | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Propylene oxide (PO) | 0.1 mL min−1 | 0.2 mL min−1 | Fixed bed flow reactor | 10 MPa, 90–160 °C | 10 g SiO2– C3H6–P(n-Bu)3Br (8.5 mmol phosphorus) | 80% in 1000 h | 99.9% | WHSV = 0.5 per h, TON = 11500, synergistic organic-inorganic catalyst | 156 |
Epichlorohydrin | 1.0 mL min−1 | 50.0 mL min−1 | Packed bed reactor | 1.4 MPa, 140 °C | Coconut shell-activated carbon (CSAC) tethered Bmim-COOH/Br | 82% in 50 h | n.a | Liquid hourly space velocity (LHSV) = 6 per h | 157 |
Propylene oxide (PO) | 15 μL min−1 | Fixed bed flow reactor | 2 MPa, 130 °C | PSIL (IMD) imidazolium-based polymer-supported ionic liquids | 41–45% in 130 h | n.a | GHSV 4000 per h | 158 | |
Styrene oxide (SO) | 5 μL min−1 | 50 μL min−1 | Continuous flow reactor | 140 bar, 150 °C | Rose bengal supported ionic liquid-like phases (RB-SILLP) | 53% in 10 days | 99% | Productivity of 1.129 | 159 |
Propylene oxide (PO) | 0.1 mL min−1 | 5.0 mL min−1 | Packed bed reactor | 2 MPa, 90 °C | DBU@SBA-15 (100 mg) | 57.1% for 2 h continuous reaction/16.86% for 24 h | 99% | 160 | |
Epichlorohydrin and 1,2 butylene oxide | 0.01–0.04 mL min−1 | 15.0 mL min−1 | Vertical fixed-bed reactor packed with the polymeric MMFR (continuous flow) | 13 bar, 120 °C | Mesoporous melamine-formaldehyde resins MMFR (1.95 g, ≤100 μm) or MMFR 250 (1.5 g, ≤100 μm) | 76–100% conversion in 7 to 13 days | 99.9% | Weight hourly space velocity (WHSV) of 0.26–1.9 h−1 | 161 |
Propylene oxide (PO) | n.a | n.a | Microreactor | 3.5 MPa, 180 °C | HETBAB | 99.8% in 14 s | n.a | 136 | |
0.3–1.2 mL min−1 | 192.5–770 mL min−1 | Microreactor followed by a delayed reactor | 2 MPa and 150 °C | Binary (salen) AlCl/nBu4NBr (TBAB) system | 90–99% with a residence time of less than 100 s | 99% | Residence time 100 s, TOF = 6800 to 14700 h−1 | 164 | |
Propylene oxide (PO) | n.a | n.a | Continuous-flow micro-reaction system | 3 MPa, 140 °C | 1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium bromide ([BMIM]Br)/H2O | 99.8% | n.a | Residence time 166 s, molar ratio of [BMIM]Br/H2O/PO to be 0.14/0.25/1, the molar ratio of CO2/PO to be 1.4 | 138 |
Terminal epoxide (R = nC4H9) | 0.1 mL min−1 | 1 mL min−1 | Microfluidic reactor | 120 bar and 220 °C | NaBr/diethylene glycol (DEG) | 91 to 99% | 92 to 99% | Reaction medium (DEG) | 165 |
Styrene oxide | n.a | n.a | “Tube-in-tube” gas–liquid continuous flow reactor | 6 bar and 120 °C | Tetrabutylammonium bromide (TBAB)/ZnBr2 homogenous system | 100% in 45 min | n.a | Activation energy decrement 55–32 kJ mol−1 = 23 kJ mol−1 | 166 |
Glycidol (Gly) | 0.155 mL min−1 | n.a | “Tube-in-tube” reactor followed by a packed bed reactor | 3 (bar CO2 local pressure) | TBD@Merrifield (catalyst loading of 1.59 g/1.48 mmol) | 99% in 48 h | n.a | MEK solvent | 113 |
LO-(cis/trans) | 0.1 mL min−1 | 1.99 mL min−1 | Continuous flow reaction | 15 MPa, 120 °C | Supported ionic liquid SLIP 1 (2.22 g) (Fig. 21) | 22% (max) and 15% (overall) in 48 h | n.a | 250 mm catalyst cartridge, production flow rate of 0.12 g h−1 | 91 |
Limonene dioxide (LDO) | 0.1 mL min−1 | 1.99 mL min−1 | Continuous flow reaction | 20 MPa, 120 °C | Supported ionic liquid SLIP 1 (2.22 g) (Fig. 21) | 27% (epoxy carbonate) 14% (bis-carbonate), and 16% (overall) in 12 h | n.a | 250 mm catalyst cartridge | 91 |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2023 |