墙上的镜子,墙上的镜子,哪个最环保?化学和生物催化氧官能化反应的重要比较

Yinqi Wu, Caroline E. Paul, Frank Hollmann
{"title":"墙上的镜子,墙上的镜子,哪个最环保?化学和生物催化氧官能化反应的重要比较","authors":"Yinqi Wu,&nbsp;Caroline E. Paul,&nbsp;Frank Hollmann","doi":"10.1016/j.greenca.2023.10.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This review article critically compares two widely used types of catalysis, chemo- and biocatalysis, and provides insights on their greenness according to specified parameters. A comparative analysis of the environmental impact of chemo- and biocatalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions based on published experimental data reveals that both methods produce comparable amounts of waste, with the majority stemming from the solvent used. However, it is emphasised that the synthesis of the catalysts themselves, including biocatalysts, should also be considered when assessing their environmental impact. The review underscores the complexity of assessing the environmental impact of catalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions. The article also discusses the relationship between solvent properties and the energy demands for chemical transformations and downstream processing, underlining that the choice of solvent can significantly influence the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Additionally, the review highlights the importance of considering the recyclability of reagents and the secondary CO<sub>2</sub> emissions caused by the energy requirements of the reaction when evaluating the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Each chemo- and biocatalysis produce a certain environmental impact, the greenness of either method is dependent on several factors, including the type of waste generated, the recyclability of reagents, and secondary CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. This review therefore recommends using consistent metrics and a comprehensive life cycle assessment approach to evaluate this environmental impact, and highlights the importance of considering the synthesis of the catalysts themselves.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100595,"journal":{"name":"Green Carbon","volume":"1 2","pages":"Pages 227-241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295015552300023X/pdfft?md5=fd93f78a32b6f65d7a4b69f68bb8d703&pid=1-s2.0-S295015552300023X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the greenest of them all? A critical comparison of chemo- and biocatalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions\",\"authors\":\"Yinqi Wu,&nbsp;Caroline E. Paul,&nbsp;Frank Hollmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.greenca.2023.10.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This review article critically compares two widely used types of catalysis, chemo- and biocatalysis, and provides insights on their greenness according to specified parameters. A comparative analysis of the environmental impact of chemo- and biocatalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions based on published experimental data reveals that both methods produce comparable amounts of waste, with the majority stemming from the solvent used. However, it is emphasised that the synthesis of the catalysts themselves, including biocatalysts, should also be considered when assessing their environmental impact. The review underscores the complexity of assessing the environmental impact of catalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions. The article also discusses the relationship between solvent properties and the energy demands for chemical transformations and downstream processing, underlining that the choice of solvent can significantly influence the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Additionally, the review highlights the importance of considering the recyclability of reagents and the secondary CO<sub>2</sub> emissions caused by the energy requirements of the reaction when evaluating the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Each chemo- and biocatalysis produce a certain environmental impact, the greenness of either method is dependent on several factors, including the type of waste generated, the recyclability of reagents, and secondary CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. This review therefore recommends using consistent metrics and a comprehensive life cycle assessment approach to evaluate this environmental impact, and highlights the importance of considering the synthesis of the catalysts themselves.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Green Carbon\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 227-241\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295015552300023X/pdfft?md5=fd93f78a32b6f65d7a4b69f68bb8d703&pid=1-s2.0-S295015552300023X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Green Carbon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295015552300023X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Green Carbon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295015552300023X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇综述文章对化学催化和生物催化这两种广泛使用的催化类型进行了批判性比较,并根据特定参数对其绿色程度提出了见解。根据已发表的实验数据对化学催化和生物催化氧官能化反应对环境的影响进行比较分析后发现,这两种方法产生的废物量相当,其中大部分来自所使用的溶剂。不过,报告强调,在评估催化剂对环境的影响时,还应考虑催化剂(包括生物催化剂)本身的合成。综述强调了评估催化氧官能化反应对环境影响的复杂性。文章还讨论了溶剂特性与化学转化和下游加工的能源需求之间的关系,强调溶剂的选择会极大地影响催化过程对环境的影响。此外,这篇综述还强调了在评估催化过程对环境的影响时,考虑试剂的可回收性和反应的能量需求所造成的二次二氧化碳排放的重要性。化学催化和生物催化都会对环境产生一定的影响,两种方法的绿色程度取决于多个因素,包括产生的废物类型、试剂的可回收性和二次二氧化碳排放。因此,本综述建议使用一致的指标和全面的生命周期评估方法来评估这种环境影响,并强调了考虑催化剂合成本身的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the greenest of them all? A critical comparison of chemo- and biocatalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions

This review article critically compares two widely used types of catalysis, chemo- and biocatalysis, and provides insights on their greenness according to specified parameters. A comparative analysis of the environmental impact of chemo- and biocatalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions based on published experimental data reveals that both methods produce comparable amounts of waste, with the majority stemming from the solvent used. However, it is emphasised that the synthesis of the catalysts themselves, including biocatalysts, should also be considered when assessing their environmental impact. The review underscores the complexity of assessing the environmental impact of catalytic oxyfunctionalisation reactions. The article also discusses the relationship between solvent properties and the energy demands for chemical transformations and downstream processing, underlining that the choice of solvent can significantly influence the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Additionally, the review highlights the importance of considering the recyclability of reagents and the secondary CO2 emissions caused by the energy requirements of the reaction when evaluating the environmental impact of a catalytic process. Each chemo- and biocatalysis produce a certain environmental impact, the greenness of either method is dependent on several factors, including the type of waste generated, the recyclability of reagents, and secondary CO2 emissions. This review therefore recommends using consistent metrics and a comprehensive life cycle assessment approach to evaluate this environmental impact, and highlights the importance of considering the synthesis of the catalysts themselves.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信