| Literature DB >> 29976847 |
Zhenhua Wang1,2, Qianwang Chen3,4.
Abstract
In recent years, the conversion of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) into 5-ethoxymethylfurfural (EMF) and ethyl levulinate (EL) has become an attractive biomass transformation route due to their potential applications in the energy and chemical industries. In this study, we have developed an effective method to prepare a catalyst for this reaction. Sulfonic-acid-functionalized carbon nanomaterials (C-SO₃H), prepared from the direct pyrolysis of Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs) precursor Cu-benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylate (Cu-BTC) followed by acidification with sulfuric acid, show excellent catalytic activity with a total yield higher than 90%. It is interesting that, different from the previous catalysts, a different major product—EMF or EL—can be selectively obtained by controlling the reaction temperature and time.Entities:
Keywords: 5-hydroxymethylfurfural; MOFs precursor; biomass; carbon material; catalysis
Year: 2018 PMID: 29976847 PMCID: PMC6070794 DOI: 10.3390/nano8070492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Scheme 1Conversion of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) into 5-ethoxymethyfurfural (EMF) and ethyl levulinate (EL) in ethanol.
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the synthesis and catalysis procedure.
Figure 2SEM images of (a) Cu-BTC particles, (b) Cu and porous carbon composites, and (c) C-SO3H particles.
Figure 3(a) X-ray diffraction pattern, (b) S2p XPS spectra, and (c) FT-IR spectra of C-SO3H.
Synthesis of EMF and EL from HMF catalyzed in different reaction conditions.
| Entry | Catalyst | Reaction Condition | Yield of EMF % | Yield of EL % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | None | 100 °C/6 h | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | None | 140 °C/6 h | 26 | 4 |
| 3 | C-SO3H | 100 °C/6 h | 71 | 22 |
| 4 | C-SO3H | 140 °C/6 h | <1 | 73 |
| 5 | Cu-BTC | 100 °C/6 h | 0 | 0 |
| 6 | Cu-C | 100 °C/6 h | 0 | 0 |
Figure 4Influence of temperature and time on the reaction. (a) Catalytic performance of the catalyst at different temperatures for 6 h. (b) Catalytic performance of the catalyst at 100 °C for different lengths of time. (c) Catalytic performance of the catalyst at 140 °C for different lengths of time.
Figure 5Catalyst recycling (reaction conditions: (a) 100 °C for 6 h; (b) 140 °C for 8 h).
The comparison of the catalytic performance of the present work with those reported in the literature.
| Entry | Catalyst | Conversion % | Yield of EMF % | Yield of EL % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 [ | Z-SBA-15 | 100 | 76 | 23 |
| 2 [ | NH4-S5.5 | 69 | 21 | 8 |
| 3 [ | CNT-PSSA | 99 | - | 84 |
| 4 [ | SO42−/ZrO2 | 100 | - | 30 |
| 5 [ | K-10 clay-Al | 78.9 | 73.2 | - |
| 6 [ | 40 wt % MCM-41-HPW | 96 | 85 | 7 |
| 7 [ | Fe3O4@SiO2-HPW | 98 | 84 | 6 |
| 8 (in this work) a | C-SO3H | 100 | 71 | 22 |
| 9 (in this work) b | C-SO3H | 100 | - | 81 |
The reaction conditions: a 100 °C for 6 h; b 140 °C for 8 h.