CuAl2O4–CuO–Al2O3 catalysts prepared by flame-spray pyrolysis for glycerol hydrogenolysis

Production of Propanediols through In Situ Glycerol Hydrogenolysis via Aqueous Phase Reforming: A Review

Production of 1,2-propanediol and 1,3-propanediol are identified as methods to reduce glycerol oversupply. Hence, glycerol hydrogenolysis is identified as a thermochemical conversion substitute; however, it requires an expensive, high-pressure pure hydrogen supply. Studies have been performed on other potential thermochemical conversion processes whereby aqueous phase reforming has been identified as an excellent substitute for the conversion process due to its low temperature requirement and high H2 yields, factors which permit the process of in-situ glycerol hydrogenolysis which requires no external H2 supply. Hence, this manuscript emphasizes delving into the possibilities of this concept to produce 1,2-propanediol and 1,3-propanediol without “breaking the bank” with expenses. Various heterogenous catalysts of aqueous phase reforming (APR) and glycerol hydrogenolysis were identified, whereby the combination of a noble metal, support, and dopant with a good amount of Brønsted acid sites are identified as the key factors to ensure a high yield of 1,3-propanediol. However, for 1,2-propanediol, a Cu-based catalyst with decent basic support is observed to be the key for good yield and selectivity of product. The findings have shown that it is possible to produce high yields of both 1,2-propanediol and 1,3-propanediol via aqueous phase reforming, specifically 1,2-propanediol, for which some of the findings achieve better selectivity compared to direct glycerol hydrogenolysis to 1,2-propanediol. This is not the case for 1,3-propanediol, for which further studies need to be conducted to evaluate its feasibility.