2020
DOI: 10.1002/ejic.202000444
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structure Function Relationships in Ruthenium Carbon Dioxide Reduction Catalysts with CNC Pincers Containing Donor Groups

Abstract: Seven ruthenium catalysts with the general formula [(CNC)Ru(CH 3 CN) 2 Cl]OTf have been used to understand structure function relationships in the sensitized photocatalytic CO 2 reduction reaction. Herein, CNC is a pincer ligand containing imidazole-based N-heterocyclic carbenes (NHCs) attached to a central pyridyl ring with R groups at the 3-or 4-position. Two new complexes (R = 3-OMe, 4-NPh 2) have been fully characterized by analytical and spectroscopic methods and single-crystal X-ray diffraction. Furtherm… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
(54 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Changes in the current passed under each atmosphere were analyzed as a ratio (i cat /i p ) where the current of the reduction peak under CO 2 is divided by the current of the reduction peak under N 2 . 26 Each cobalt complex studied herein had a reduction peak more positive than fac-Ir(ppy) 3 (−2.61 V vs Fc + /Fc) indicating thermodynamically downhill electron transfer from the reduced photosensitizer to the catalyst (Table 4 and Figure 5). 27 Assuming a pK a value of 18.5 for protonated triethylamine (the strongest acid in the photocatalysis conditions below) in acetonitrile 60,61 and a standard reduction potential of CO 2 in MeCN at −0.12 V vs Fc + /Fc (ferrocenium/ferrocene), 62 then the reduction potential of CO 2 under the photocatalysis conditions is −1.21 V vs Fc + /Fc (Figure 5).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Changes in the current passed under each atmosphere were analyzed as a ratio (i cat /i p ) where the current of the reduction peak under CO 2 is divided by the current of the reduction peak under N 2 . 26 Each cobalt complex studied herein had a reduction peak more positive than fac-Ir(ppy) 3 (−2.61 V vs Fc + /Fc) indicating thermodynamically downhill electron transfer from the reduced photosensitizer to the catalyst (Table 4 and Figure 5). 27 Assuming a pK a value of 18.5 for protonated triethylamine (the strongest acid in the photocatalysis conditions below) in acetonitrile 60,61 and a standard reduction potential of CO 2 in MeCN at −0.12 V vs Fc + /Fc (ferrocenium/ferrocene), 62 then the reduction potential of CO 2 under the photocatalysis conditions is −1.21 V vs Fc + /Fc (Figure 5).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…In contrast to L1 complexes, the methoxy derivative with PPh 3 coordinated L2 complex ( 2 PPh3 ) showed significantly less CO production (TON = 26) vs the unsubstituted analogue 1 PPh3 (TON = 199). Thus, the methoxy group is deactivating for these Co­(I) complexes which is in contrast to the catalytic trends for these same ligands bound to Ru­(II) or with pendatentate Co­(II) complexes (e.g., Lit-4 and Lit-3 , respectively, Figure , TON: OMe > H). ,,,, This suggests different ligand design trends may be necessary for optimal low-valent Co­(I) catalysts in the PCO 2 RR.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 3 more Smart Citations