Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T18:02:26.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Electrolysis of Alcohols in High Temperature-High Pressure Water

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2013

Asli Yuksel
Affiliation:
Chemical Engineering, Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, TURKEY
Mitsuru Sasaki
Affiliation:
Applied Chemistry and Biochemistry, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, JAPAN
Motonobu Goto
Affiliation:
Chemical Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya, JAPAN
Get access

Abstract

The design of clean, efficient and environmentally friendly routes that reduce the waste production and fuel emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere, produce clean, affordable, and renewable energy sources to lessen energy consumption and toxicity on the environment, has become a central issue of chemical research both in industry and academia. One of the approaches being used in green chemistry practices is to use water as a solvent and reaction medium where possible. Much of this work deals with liquid water at temperatures exceeding the normal boiling point which is denoted as sub-critical water.

Electrochemical reaction, usually operated at atmospheric condition in water, is generally slow, although it has advantages over chemical reaction such as suppression of side reaction by tuning operating conditions. Since sub-critical water (7 MPa and 250 °C) has remarkable properties such as high ion product and low dielectric constant, it could be a suitable reaction media.

We have been studying electrolysis of organic compounds in sub-critical water as waste treatment and molecular degradation technologies. Electrolysis in sub-critical water could degrade harmful and thermally stable organic compounds into innocuous compounds such as hydrogen and water. In this research, we focused on the investigation of the electrochemical reactions of alcohols in sub-critical water to evaluate possibility for the selective production of hydrogen and value-added chemicals.

Electrochemical reactions were carried out in sub-critical water using a specially designed autoclave made of SS 316 with a volume of 500 mL. For comparison, thermal degradation experiments of alcohols were also conducted without any direct current loading at identical conditions. Here we employed glycerol and 1-butanol as model compounds of alcohols.

As a result of 1-butanol experiments, butanal and butyric acid were produced via partial oxidation at 250 °C and by applying 1-3 A of direct current while no oxidation products were observed at the hydrothermal degradation run. As a gaseous product, hydrogen gas was generated according to the electrochemical reaction mechanism. In the case of glycerol experiments, the main gaseous product was hydrogen gas, whereas glycolaldehyde, lactic acid, and formic acid were generated as the main liquid products at 280 °C. Results indicated that greater than 92% of the glycerol could be decomposed under optimum conditions by hydrothermal electrolysis technique.

This presented research will help to degrade stable organic materials in an environmentally friendly way and without need for secondary treatment processes. It will also address the need for novel more efficient techniques for the degradation of stable organic compounds in aqueous conditions and it will advance the use of water as a reaction medium in an efficient way without any organic solvent.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ott, L., Bicker, M. and Vogel, H., Green Chem. 8, 214 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehr, V., Sarlea, M., Ott, L. and Vogel, H., Catalysis Today 121, 121 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, M., Lida, T., Aizawa, Y., Aida, T. M. and Inomata, H., Bioresource Technology 98, 1285 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, W., Dinjus, E., Ederer, H. J., Kruse, A. and Mas, C., Journal of Supercritical Fluids 22, 37 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valliyappan, T., Bakhsi, N. N. and Dalai, A. K., Bioresource Technology 99, 4476 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antal, M. J., Mok, W. S. L., Roy, J. C., Raissi, A. T. and Anderson, D. G. M., J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 8, 291 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Y. S., Antal, M. J. and Jones, M. J., J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 4, 283 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kishida, H., Jin, F., Zhou, Z., Moriya, T. and Enomoto, H., Chemistry Letters 34, 11 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogalinski, T., Liu, K., Albrecht, T. and Brunner, G., J. of Supercritical Fluids 46, 335 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, T., Fundamentals of Supercritical Fluids (Oxford University Press, New York, 1998) p. 23.Google Scholar
Savage, P. E., Chem. Rev. 99, 603 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asghari, F. S. and Yoshida, H., J. Phys. Chem. A 112, 7402 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuksel, A., Koga, H., Sasaki, M. and Goto, M., J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 1, 033112 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar