| Literature DB >> 28184241 |
Idris Mohamed Saeed1, Vannajan Sanghiran Lee2, Shaukat Ali Mazari3, B Si Ali1, Wan Jeffrey Basirun2, Anam Asghar1, Lubna Ghalib1, Badrul Mohamed Jan1.
Abstract
Amine degradation is the main significant problems in amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture, causes foaming, increase in viscosity, corrosion, fouling as well as environmental issues. Therefore it is very important to develop the most efficient solvent with high thermal and chemical stability. This study investigated thermal degradation of aqueous 30% 2-aminoethylethanolamine (AEEA) using 316 stainless steel cylinders in the presence and absence of CO2 for 4 weeks. The degradation products were identified by gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and liquid chromatography-time-of-flight-mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF/MS). The results showed AEEA is stable in the absence of CO2, while in the presence of CO2 AEEA showed to be very unstable and numbers of degradation products were identified. 1-(2-Hydroxyethyl)-2-imidazolidinone (HEIA) was the most abundance degradation product. A possible mechanism for the thermal degradation of AEEA has been developed to explain the formation of degradation products. In addition, the reaction energy of formation of the most abundance degradation product HEIA was calculated using quantum mechanical calculation.Entities:
Keywords: 2-aminoethylethanolamine (AEEA); CO2 capture; Computational study; Mechanism; Thermal degradation
Year: 2017 PMID: 28184241 PMCID: PMC5265229 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-016-0231-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
Fig. 1Schematic diagram of CO2 loading setup for amine saturation method
GC–MS parameters for identifications of degradation products
| Column | RTX®-5MS |
|---|---|
| Length (m) | 30.00 |
| Internal diameter (µm) | 0.25 mm |
| Thickness (µm) | 0.25 µm |
| Initial temp. (°C) | 70 |
| Initial hold time (min) | 1 |
| Oven ramp (1) (°C min–1) | 5 |
| Oven ramp (2) (°C min–1) | 5 |
| Final temp. (°C) | 240 |
| Final hold time (min) | 10 |
| Injector temp. (°C) | 300 |
| Flow rate (constant) (ml min−1) | 1 |
| Carrier gas | He |
Gradient profile for the mobile phase ratio in this experiment
| Time (min) | Mobile phase ratio | |
|---|---|---|
| Formic acid (0.10%) | Methanol (99.9%) | |
| 6 | 98 | 2 |
| 2 | 20 | 80 |
| 8–14 | 98 | 2 |
Fig. 2Gas chromatogram (a) and mass spectrum of HEIA (b) of aqueous AEEA solution After 4 weeks of the experiment using 30 wt% AEEA at temperature 135 °C with 0.80 moleCO2/mol of amine
Compounds identified by the present study by using GC-MS and LC-MS-QTOF in AEEA/CO2/H2O system at 135 °C
| Compound | Abb. | MW (g/mol) | Structures | Analytical technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diethanolamine | DEA | 105 |
| GC–MS |
| 1-Piperazineethanol | HEP | 126 |
| GC–MS |
| 1,4-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)piperazine | BHEP | 130 |
| GC–MS |
| 2-Imidazolidinone | HEI | 86 |
| GC–MS |
| 1-(2-Hydroxyethyl)-2-imidazolidinone | HEIA | 130 |
| GC–MS |
| 2-((2-Aminoethyl)-(2-(2-aminoethylamino)-(ethylamino)ethanol | AAEEA* | 191 |
| – |
| 2-hydroxyethyl-2-oxazolidone | HEOD | 131 |
| GC–MS |
| Succinimide | Succ | 99 |
| GC–MS |
| N-Methylsuccinimide | MSucc | 113 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| N,N’-Dimethyl-2-imidazolidinone | DMDZ | 114 |
| GC–MS |
| 4-[(2-Hydroxyethyl)(nitroso)amino]-1-butanol | HNAP | 162 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| 1-Nitroso-4-piperidinol | NP | 117 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| 4-[Butyl(nitroso)amino]-2-butanol | BNAB | 173 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| N-(Butyl(nitroso)amino)methyl)acetamide | BNAMA | 173 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| (3-Aminopropyl)morpholine | AMM | 144 |
| GC–MS |
| N-(2-hydroxyethyl)-N -methylpiperazine | MPE | 144 |
| GC–MS |
| 1,4-Diformylpiperazine | DFP | 142 |
| GC–MS |
| Homoserine | Hom | 119 |
| GC–MS |
| 1-Methyl-4-nitrosopiperazine | MNP | 129 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| Pyrazole-1-ethanol | PE | 112 |
| LC-MS-QTOF |
| 1-Piperazineethanamine | AEP | 129 |
| GC–MS |
| 1-(2-(2-Hydroxyethoxy)ethyl) piperazine | HEEP | 174 |
| GC–MS |
| N-[2-[3-[N-Aziridyl]propyl]aminoethyl]piperazine | APAP | 212 |
| GC–MS |
| Tetraethylenepentamine | TEP | 191 |
| GC–MS |
Fig. 3Percentage of AEEA loss and formation of degradation products
Scheme 1Proposed mechanisms for the formation of HEIA and HEOD
Scheme 2Proposed mechanisms for the formation of HEI
Scheme 3Proposed mechanism for the formation of DFP
Scheme 4Proposed mechanism for the formation of BHEP
Scheme 5Proposed mechanisms for the formation of DMDZ
Fig. 4Reaction energy profile for the formation of HEIA (path 1) based on B3LYP/6-311++g(d, p) calculation
Fig. 5Reaction energy profile for the formation of HEIA (path 2) based on B3LYP/6-311++g(d, p) calculation
The computed energy and activation barriers for TS1, TS2 obtained at B3LYP/6-311++g(d, p) level of theory for the formation of product according to Figs. 4 and 5
| Species | Energy (Ha) | Relative energy (Ha) | Relative energy (kcal/mol) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reactant 1 | −533.1227263 | 0 | 0.00 |
| TS1 | −532.8979985 | 0.22472785 | 141.02 |
| Product 1 | −533.1261536 | −0.00342728 | −2.15 |
| Reactant 2 | −533.1150498 | 0 | 0.00 |
| TS2 | −532.9009546 | 0.214095141 | 134.35 |
| Product 2 | −533.1261536 | −0.011103859 | −6.97 |