4.7 Review

Heterogeneous catalytic materials for carboxylation reactions with CO2 as reactant

期刊

JOURNAL OF CO2 UTILIZATION
卷 66, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcou.2022.102250

关键词

Heterogeneous catalysis; Carbon dioxide; Carboxylation; Carbonates; Carboxylic acids

资金

  1. Slovenian Research Agency [J2-1723, J2-2492, P2-0152]
  2. Republic of Slovenia, Ministry of Education, Science and Sport
  3. European Union through the European Regional Development Fund, 2016-2020

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review article focuses on the heterogeneous catalytic conversion of carbon dioxide (CO2) to various compounds. It discusses the formation of alkyl carbonates, cyclic carbonates, carbamates, and carboxylic acids through carboxylation reactions. The article provides detailed elaboration on reaction conditions, catalysts, activity/selectivity, and comparison of results obtained from recent publications.
As the most abundant C1 carbon source, as well as renewable and highly environmentally unfriendly compound, carbon dioxide serves as a very promising compound for the chemical industry. This review focuses on heterogeneous catalytic conversion of CO2 to various compounds, which would then offer reusable, cheaper, and safer reaction conditions. Most of the heterogeneously catalyzed reactions with CO2 involve carboxylation of simple alcohols to alkyl carbonates, thus formation of new C-O bonds. Additional C-O bond-forming type- reactions involve formation of cyclic carbonates from carboxylation of glycerol, propargylic alcohols, and epoxides. C-N bond formation was also investigated through carbamates synthesis, while most importantly C-C bond formation was discussed in preparation of various carboxylic acids. In this review article, the state-of-the-art was presented with detailed elaboration on reaction conditions used, activity/selectivity or chosen catalysts, as well as critical comparison in results obtained and conclusions drawn from most recent publications.

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

4.7
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