| Literature DB >> 35530384 |
Ayman Hijazi1, Nidal Khalaf1, Witold Kwapinski1, J J Leahy1.
Abstract
This review sheds light on the catalytic valorisation of agroforestry biomass through levulinic acid and formic acid towards γ-valerolactone and other higher-value chemicals. γ-Valerolactone is produced by the hydrogenation of levulinic acid, which can be achieved through an internal hydrogen transfer reaction with formic acid in the presence of catalyst. By reviewing corresponding catalysts, the paper underlines the most efficient steps constituting an integrated sustainable process that eliminates the need for external H2 sources while producing biofuels as an alternative energy source. Furthermore, the review emphasizes the role of catalysts in the hydrogenation of levulinic acid, with special focus on heterogeneous catalysts. The authors highlighted the dual role of different catalysts by comparing their activity, morphology, electronic structure, synergetic relation between support and doped species, as well as their deactivation and recyclability. Acknowledging the need for green and sustainable H2 production, the review extends to cover the role of photo catalysis in dissociating H2-donor solvents for reducing levulinic acid into γ-valerolactone under mild temperatures. To wrap up, the critical discussion presented enables readers to hone their knowledge about different schools and emphasizes research gaps emerging from experimental work. The review concludes with a comprehensive table summarizing the recent catalysts reported between the years 2017-2021. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35530384 PMCID: PMC9073962 DOI: 10.1039/d2ra01379g
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Heterogeneous catalysts for FA decomposition into H2 & CO2
| Catalyst | TOF (H2) | Solvent | Temp. (°C) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pd–P–SiO2 | 719 h−1 | Formate salts HCOONa | 85 |
|
| Pd–S–SiO2 | 959 h−1 | K2SO4 | 85 |
|
| Pd shell@Ag core | 252 h−1 | H2O | 50 |
|
| Pd–Au/C | 27 h−1 | Formate salts HCOONa | 90 |
|
| Pd–Au/C–CeO | 832 h−1 | Formate salts HCOONa | 102 |
|
| Pd/γ-Al2O3 | 600 h−1 | NaOH, 0.1 vol% O2 | 20 |
|
| 1 wt% Pd/C | 255 h−1 | Gaseous phase | 100 |
|
| Au/TiO2 | 201 h−1 | Gaseous phase | 100 |
|
| Au/SiO2 | 7023 h−1 | Gaseous phase | 100–300 |
|
TOF: Turn over frequency (s−1).
List of heterogeneous catalysts (2017–2021) for conversion of levulinic acid in presence of FA as sole source of H2a
| Year | Substrate | H2 Donor | Catalyst |
|
|
| Recyclability |
| Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | LA | FA | Cu–SiO2 | 230 | 1 | 53%a | 82%d |
| |
| Cu–SiO2 | 270 | 1 | 66%a | 81%d | |||||
| Cu–SiO2 | 290 | 1 | 68%a | 75%d | |||||
| 2017 | LA | FA | Triethoxy-silylpropoxy-Shvo's catalys | 90 | 12 | 90.93%a | 99.90%d |
| |
| 28c | |||||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA | Au–Ni/γ-Al2O3 | 190 | 2 | 89%a, 86%b |
| ||
| 2018 | LA | FA | 2 wt% Au/Ce0.4Zr0.6O2 | 240 | 2 | 90.8%a | • Recovery of catalyst by centrifugation, then washing with pure water and ethanol and dry at room temperature | 100%d |
|
| 83.5%b | |||||||||
| Au/ZrO2 | 240 | 2 | 40.7%a | 89.5%d | |||||
| 36.4%b | |||||||||
| 0.6 wt% Au/Ce0.4Zr0.6O2 | 240 | 2 | 63.5%a | 77.3%d | |||||
| 49.7%b | |||||||||
| 240 | 2 | 13.1%a | • Good stability due to tetragonal phase attributing to strong metal–support interaction | 70.2%d | |||||
| Au/CeO2 | 9.2%b | • Limited decrease in activity after 5 runs | |||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA | Calcined hydrotalcite Mg/Al (3 : 1) | 270 | 5 | 100%a | • Cycle I TOS = 30 h | 98%d |
|
| 1%e | |||||||||
| Cycle II TOS = 22 h | |||||||||
| Cycle III TOS = 14 h | |||||||||
| Cycle IV TOS = 9 h | |||||||||
| • Regeneration of active sites under flowing air after each cycle | |||||||||
| • After cycle IV, LA conversion slightly decreased to 86% | |||||||||
| • After cycle IV, GVL selectivity was constant at 98% | |||||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA (1 : 1) | RANEY® Ni catalyst | 200 | 24 | 52.6%a 20.4%b |
| ||
| FA (1 : 1) | RANEY® Ni catalyst | 200 | 48 | 62.6%a | |||||
| 24.4%b | |||||||||
| FA (1 : 2) | RANEY® Ni catalyst | 200 | 48 | 90.9%a | |||||
| 60.5%b | |||||||||
| FA (1 : 4) | RANEY® Ni catalyst | 200 | 48 | 100%a | |||||
| 68.5%b | |||||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA | 0.2 g Ru/C + 3 mL triethyl-amine | 160 | 3 | 87.26%a |
| ||
| 80.75%b | |||||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA | 2.5% Ru/ZrO2 | 150 | 12 | 73%a | • Catalyst washed with water | >99%d |
|
| 2.5% Ru/ZrO2 (WI) | 150 | 12 | 63%a | • Activity significantly from 73% to 54% in the second run | >99%d | ||||
| • XRD showed transformation from tetragonal to the thermodynamically stable monoclinic structure | |||||||||
| 2018 | LA | FA | Cu–SiO2 | 250 | 1 | 48%a | • Deactivation of Cu–SiO2 catalyst studied at 250 °C with LA : FA ratio = 1 : 2 | 80%d |
|
| 17%e | |||||||||
| Cu–TiO2 | 250 | 1 | 8%a | • Consistent conversion of LA (48%) and selectivity of GVL | 25%d | ||||
| 55%e | |||||||||
| Cu-ZSM-5 | 250 | 1 | 38%a | • Strong interaction between Cu with SiO2 support | 4%d | ||||
| 82%e | |||||||||
| Cu–Al2O3 | 250 | 1 | 24%a | • Insignificant coke formation of Cu–SiO2 and Cu–TiO2 catalysts | 77%d | ||||
| 15%e | |||||||||
| 2019 | LA | FA | 6 wt% Au/ZrO2 | 210 | 5 | 93.3%a | • Catalyst washed by acetone 5 times and dried at 100 °C for 2 h | 91.1%d | |
| 85%b | • Stable after 3 cycles with 69% yield of GVL | ||||||||
| Selectivity of catalyst was not affected | |||||||||
| 4 wt% Au/ZrO2 | 210 | 5 | 80.8%a | 87.1%d |
| ||||
| 70.4%b | |||||||||
| 1 wt% Au/ZrO2 | 210 | 5 | 13.6%a | 98.5%d | |||||
| 13.4%b | |||||||||
| 2019 | LA | FA | 1.6 Pt/MP-ZrO2 | 220 | 24 | 82%a |
| ||
| 84%b | |||||||||
| 1.5 Pt/MP-ZrO2 | 220 | 24 | 53%a | ||||||
| 52%b | |||||||||
| 2020 | LA | FA | CoO | 230 | 20 | 37.3%a | • Mn2CoO | 85.2%d | |
| 10%f | |||||||||
| 2020 | LA | FA | MnO | 230 | 20 | 76.7%a | • Conversion of LA fluctuated slightly around 60% from the 1st to the 5th cycle | 74.7%d |
|
| 12%f | |||||||||
| Mn2Co0.1O | 230 | 20 | 78.9%a | • GVL yield fluctuated between 84% and 87% from the 1st to the 5th cycle | 76.7%d | ||||
| 11.8%f | |||||||||
| Mn2Co0.1O | 230 | 20 | 83.4%a | • Selectivity of VA did not change dramatically from the 1st to the 5th cycle | 70%d | ||||
| 14.1%f | |||||||||
| 2020 | LA | FA | 1Au/ZrO2 | 240 | 1 | 66.7%a | • Recyclability of 1Au–2Ni/ZrO2 catalyst | 90.9%d |
|
| 73.4 %b | |||||||||
| 1Au–2Ni/ZrO2 | 240 | 1 | 87.9%a | • Spent catalyst was recovered by simple filtration | 98.7%d | ||||
| 89.1%b | |||||||||
| 0.5Au–2Ni/ZrO2 | 240 | 1 | 62.2%a | • Calcined at 300 °C for 4 h. & reduced in H2 flow at 300 °C for 1h | 98.4%d | ||||
| 63%b | |||||||||
| 2Ni/ZrO2 | 240 | 1 | 1.2%b | • GVL yield showed a slight decrease after 3 cycles | |||||
| • Good recyclability of Au–Ni/ZrO2 | |||||||||
| 2021 | LA | FA | ZnAl oxide | 140 | <6 | 87%a | • Continuous but slight decrease in LA conversion during first 4 cycles | 90%d |
|
| 90%b | • LA is being directly or indirectly deposited on catalytic surface | ||||||||
| • After 4th cycle, used catalyst was calcined at 600 °C, and TPO results were similar to the fresh catalyst | |||||||||
| 2021 | Glucose | FA | Ru/TiO2 | 190 | 2 | 38.98%a |
|
X = conversion (%); Y = yield (%); TOF = turnover frequency (s−1) S = selectivity (%); LA = levulinic acid; GVL = γ-valerolactone; AL = angelica lactone; VA = valeric acid.
Fig. 1Crystallization process of Pd/Au@Au/C system.[39]
Fig. 2Biomass platform molecules upgrade into valuable products and fuel additives.[3]
Fig. 3Possible routes for dehydration of carbohydrates into levulinic acid and furfural platform compounds.[61]
Fig. 4Two-stage production of levulinic acid and formic acid from cellulose.[63]
Fig. 5Proposed reaction pathway of LA into GVL and ethyl levulinate using FA.[71]
Fig. 6Levulinic acid hydrogenation mechanism over Ru/C catalyst.[11]
Fig. 7Competitive FA dehydrogenation and LA hydrogenation over Pt active sites to GVL and PA.[85]
Fig. 8Conversion routes of LA into GVL.[96]