Heterogeneously Catalyzed Oxidation Reactions Using ... - CHEC
Heterogeneously Catalyzed Oxidation Reactions Using ... - CHEC
Heterogeneously Catalyzed Oxidation Reactions Using ... - CHEC
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
CHAPTER 6<br />
conditions where, however, free organic radicals could not be detected. Potential free radicals could<br />
be EPR inactive due to coupling or their concentration is below the limit of detection. The inhibiting<br />
effect of radical scavengers might also be due to adsorption or coordination to free Co sites [48]. A<br />
signal at g = 2.0076 was found which can be ascribed to Co III ‐O2* ‐ (superoxo‐) species formed from<br />
reaction of Co II with oxygen [49]. These can already be found in the solid catalyst measured ex situ<br />
and thus are not formed specifically under reaction conditions. Hence, their formation is likely not<br />
connected to the induction phase. Note that Co III ‐peroxo‐species, which might also form from<br />
reaction of Co II with O2, are not EPR active [50].<br />
6.3.7 Co-epoxidation of styrene and (E)-stilbene<br />
Driven by the observation that styrene epoxidation does not only proceed faster but also features a<br />
shorter induction phase, the co‐epoxidation of styrene and (E)‐stilbene was investigated thus<br />
doubling the substrate/catalyst ratio (Figure 6‐10a). Although the catalyst amount was not<br />
increased, styrene induced a much faster conversion of (E)‐stilbene. At the same time, the<br />
conversion of styrene became only slightly but significantly slower at medium conversions. Co‐<br />
epoxidation with styrene had the strongest effect on the conversion of (Z)‐stilbene which increased<br />
from 11 % to 58 % with styrene (Table 6‐3, entry 1,2). This effect was not observed for the<br />
homogeneous Co catalysts neither for (E)‐ nor (Z)‐stilbene epoxidation (Table 6‐3, entry 3, 4) and<br />
might be an effect related to the special features of the MOF. Styrene being smaller than (E)‐stilbene<br />
can diffuse more easily into the micropores of the MOF. However, a transfer‐epoxidation from<br />
styrene oxide to (E)‐stilbene does not account for the styrene promotion since styrene oxide as an<br />
additive did not have any promoting effect even in large quantities. Oxygen transfer from styrene<br />
oxide as the potential oxidizing agent to (E)‐stilbene was also not observed under reaction conditions<br />
with flowing N2 instead of O2.<br />
168