Molecular screening of ionic liquids for CO2 absorption and molecular dynamic simulation

Xingang Jia; Xiaoling Hu; Kehe Su; Wenzhen Wang; Chunbao Du

doi:10.1515/chem-2022-0154

Artikel Open Access

Molecular screening of ionic liquids for CO₂ absorption and molecular dynamic simulation

Xingang Jia , Xiaoling Hu , Kehe Su , Wenzhen Wang und Chunbao Du

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 28. April 2022

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen Erkunden Sie dieses Fachgebiet

Aus der Zeitschrift Open Chemistry Band 20 Heft 1

Abstract

Though ionic liquids (ILs) are considered potential materials for CO₂ capture because of their unique properties, it is time-consuming and costly to choose task-specific and suitable IL using the traditional “try-and-error” method. From the point of molecular design view, 25 cations and 20 anions are combined and screened using COSMOtherm to predict CO₂ solubility at 298 K and 100 kPa. The prediction result showed that ILs with bFAP(tris(nonafluorobutyl)trifluorophosphate) anion could dissolve more CO₂ than any others. To further understand the absorption performance of CO₂ in ILs, molecular dynamic simulations are carried out to explore the interactions between CO₂ and the four selected ILs, namely, [EMPyr][bFAP](1-ethyl-2-methylpyrazolium tris(nonafluorobutyl)trifluorophosphate), [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP](butyl-trihexyl-phosphonium tris(nonafluorobutyl) trif-luorobutyl trifluorophosphate), [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP](n,n,n,n,n-pentamethyl-n-isopropylguanidinium tris(nona-fluorobutyl)-trifluorophosphate), and [BEIM][bFAP] (1-butyl-3-ethyl-imidazolium tris(nonafluorobutyl)trifluo-rophosphate), at the atomic and molecular levels.

Keywords: ionic liquid; CO2 absorption; screening; molecular dynamics

1 Introduction

Human emissions of carbon dioxide are continuously increasing and have been a primary driver of global climate change [1,2]. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted that the global surface temperature change at the end of the twenty-first century would likely exceed 1.5°C [3]. It is a vast and urgent challenge for human beings to cope with global warming [4]. Consequently, CO₂ capture and storage/utilization (CCS/CCU) have been widely accepted as an effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. New materials such as ionic liquids (ILs) have been researched and developed for cost-effective CO₂ capture and utilization. Except for its own unique physical characteristics, the properties of ILs can also be adjusted and designed for specific applications. Since Blanchard et al. [5] first reported that CO₂ has high solubility in [BMIM][BF₆] in 1999, a quite large number of studies have been focused on the application of the possibility of ILs in CO₂ absorption processes [6,7,8,9,10]. Aki et al. studied the effects of the alkyl chain length from butyl to octyl on CO₂ solubility [11]. The result showed that the longer the chain length was, the more soluble it was. Pankaj et al. [12,13] studied the role of anions in ILs and found ILs containing different anions had different CO₂ solubility. The mechanism of CO₂ solubility in ILs is generally categorized into physical absorption and chemical absorption. Some functionalized ILs are capable of chemically binding to CO₂ where covalent bonds are formed during CO₂ absorption in ILs [14,15]. The two types of absorptions have their own advantages and disadvantages. Compared with chemical absorption, physical absorption has the advantage of less energy required for desorption [16]. Whether ILs are classified into physical or chemical absorption, as a potential alternative for CO₂ capture, the possible number of ILs was theoretically huge up to 10¹⁸. Obviously, it was time-consuming and costly to develop novel ILs used for specific applications from the vast sea of ILs by the traditional “try and error” method. The Conductor-like Screening Model for Real Solvents (COSMO-RS) used to predict the thermodynamic properties of ILs has been successfully proven to be effective in many literature [17,18,19,20,21]. It combined statistical thermodynamics and quantum chemistry and can be used as a valuable tool to screen molecules for a specific application based on the molecular structure.

The aim of this work is to systematically develop a way by using COSMOtherm to quickly screen 500 different ILs, which are combined by 25 cations and 20 anions, and get CO₂ solubility in ILs. Molecular dynamic (MD) simulation had been proved to be a powerful tool in studying and predicting the physical properties of IL-related systems [22,23,24]. It can provide a fundamental relationship between microscopic and macroscopic properties. To further have a deep understanding of the structural properties and the interactions of ILs and CO₂, simulation was also carried out in this work. To achieve the goal, we investigate the solvation energy and transport properties of CO₂ in four different ILs which shared a common anion based on the screened results. It is hoped that our study could help provide a better understanding of the CO₂ absorption mechanism by ILs and facilitate the novel ILs design for CO₂ absorption.

2 Methods

2.1 Screened ILs and COSMO-RS calculations

ILs can theoretically be designed by combining different anions and cations; 25 cations and 20 anions are selected to combine 500 IL solvents. Their structures and names are listed in Tables S1 and S2 of the supporting information. The cations include pyrazolium, phosphonium, ammonium, imidazolium, pyridinium, pyrrolidinium, guanidinium, and piperidinium. The anions include acetate, phosphate, sulfate, and dicyanamide. COSMOtherm was used to predict the solubility of CO₂ in the above-mentioned ILs. The standard operating procedure of COSMOtherm contains two steps. First, quantum calculation of the involved molecule species is performed by Gaussian or Turbmole suit program. Second, statistical thermodynamics calculation is carried out within COSMOtherm. All screened IL structures could be seen as the combination of ion pairs, namely, cation and anion. The structures of ion pairs, which had been early optimized using four different theoretical levels and incorporated into the program, were directly loaded from the database. As suggested in the study by ref. [25], a molecular model of counter ions was applied in COSMOtherm calculations. ILs are treated as equimolar mixtures of cations and anions. The parameterization (BP_TZVPD_FINE_20.ctd) contains the intrinsic parameters for the calculation and is used. The σ-profile, which contains the screening charges on the molecular surface, was used as an input in the COSMOtherm to calculate the solubility of CO₂ in ILs at near ambient pressure and temperature.

2.2 Molecular dynamics simulations

MD simulations were carried out using GROMACS 2018.2 program package [26]. The force field, General AMBER Force Field (GAFF), was used in the MD simulations. Each anion or cation in ILs was geometrically optimized at B3LYP/6-311 + G(d,p) in Gaussian 16 package [27]. The atom RESP charges of ILs were calculated using Multiwfn 3.7 program [28,29]. The bonded and non-bonded parameters used in the simulation are obtained by ACPYPE online server [30]. A leap-frog algorithm was used to integrate Newton’s equations of motion, and the time step of 2fs was adopted in all the simulations. The temperature was controlled by a velocity rescaling thermostat with a coupling constant of 0.4 ps [31]. The pressure was maintained by Parrinello–Rahman barostat with a coupling constant of 2.0 ps [32]. The periodic boundary conditions were applied in all directions. The bonds were constrained with the LINCS algorithm [33]. The cut-off for the short-range electrostatics and Lennard–Jones interactions were both set to 1.0 nm, and the particle mesh Ewald algorithm [34] was used to deal with the long-range electrostatic interactions. For each system, energy minimization of the simulation system was first performed with the steepest descent algorithm to generate an appropriate starting configuration and then equilibrated for 1 ns at isothermal and fixed volume (NVT) ensemble to reach the reference temperature of 298.15 K and the reference pressure of 1 bar, respectively. Then, 20 ns trajectory was produced at the isothermal and isobaric (NPT) ensemble, and the last 10 ns trajectory was used for statistical analysis.

Free energy of CO₂ in pure water and ILs was calculated using the BAR (Bennett Acceptance Ratio) method with 21 equidistant sets of λ values from λ = 0 to λ = 1. TIP4P water model was used. Coordinates, velocities, and δH/δλ were saved to disk at every ten steps for the post-processing of BAR. Each node was subjected to energy minimization with 20,000 steps of the steepest descent method. The simulation was then pre-equilibrated at NVT ensemble with no position restrains. After NVT equilibration, the process was continued with 2 ns simulations at NPT at 298 K for all systems. Data collection was done from the last 1 ns.

3 Solubility data and simulation models

3.1 CO₂ solubility in ILs

The solubility of CO₂ in 500 ILs is calculated at 298 K and 100 kPa using the method mentioned above, and the results are tabulated in Table S3. Figure 1 shows the trend and difference of CO₂ solubility in the screened ILs.

Figure 1

CO₂ relative solubility in ILs calculated by COSMOtherm.

The previous studies have investigated cation and anion effects on CO₂ solubility [35,36,37]. The combination of cation and anion can affect CO₂ solubility. Generally, CO₂ solubility in ILs strongly depends on the choice of the anion. Aki et al. also studied the influence of the anion with the same 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium cation [11]. They proved that the fluorination of the anion can improve CO₂ solubility. The trend of CO₂ solubility in ILs predicted by COSMOtherm is consistent with the previous work. It was concluded from Figure 1 that ILs with B(Hex)₃P cation have much higher CO₂ solubility than any other ILs, and CO₂ solubility in ILs with bFAP anion was also much higher than any other ILs. CO₂ solubility in various ILs is much different. Among the 500 screened ILs, the highest CO₂ solubility is 0.084 mole fraction in [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], while the lowest CO₂ solubility is 0.002 mole fraction in [MPrAm][NO₃] at 298 K and 100 kPa.

The previous experiments explored ILs containing nitrile anion that had a higher CO₂ solubility [38,39]. Their work showed that CO₂ solubility in [emim][B(CN)₄] (1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazolium tetracyanoborate) is 0.027 mole fraction. Compared with that, ILs containing [bFAP] anion have much higher CO₂ solubility.

3.2 MD simulations of ILs and ILs/CO₂

A few of ILs were selected according to the CO₂ solubility data. Specifically, bFAP anion was paired with four different cations, namely, [EMPyr](1-ethyl-2-methylpyrazolium), [B(Hex)₃P](butyl-trihexyl-phosphonium), [(Me)₅isobuGua](n,n,n,n,n-pentamethyl-n-isopropyl-guanidinium), and [BEIM](1-butyl-3-ethyl-imidazolium). Two kinds of MD simulations were performed. The first set was to examine CO₂ solvation free energy in ILs. The second was to mimic the equilibrium and dynamic properties of pure ILs and the IL/CO₂ system. For the calculation of CO₂ solvation free energy in IL, 1 CO₂ molecule was put into the center of the cubic box. For the pure IL simulation system, a cubic box of 8 nm × 8 nm × 8 nm was created with 256 pairs of cation and anion. For IL/CO₂ system, the simulation box was constructed by 10 CO₂ molecules and 256 ion pairs. The initial configurations of the MD simulations were built by the Packmol package [40].

4 Results and discussions

4.1 Henry constant and solvation free energy of CO₂ in ILs

Henry constant, as another measure of CO₂ solubility in ILs, could also be computed using COSMOtherm. The computed Henry constants of CO₂ in pure water and the four selected ILs are listed in Table 1. Additionally, to understand and compare the CO₂ absorption ability in ILs and water from the point of solvation free energy, the CO₂ solvation free energy in pure water was also computed by the BAR method and COSMOtherm. The values of the solvation free energy of CO₂ (abbreviated as ΔG) in pure water and four different ILs are listed in Table 1. The calculated results using the BAR method are 3.80 kJ mol⁻¹ in pure water, −10.18 kJ mol⁻¹ in [EMPyr][bFAP], −11.37 kJ mol⁻¹ in [BEIM][bFAP], −12.21 kJ mol⁻¹ in [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP], and −10.43 kJ mol⁻¹ in [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], respectively. Compared with the solvation free energy of CO₂ in pure water, the negative values clearly showed that the CO₂ molecule is more easily dissolved in IL than in water.

Table 1

Henry constant and solvation free energy of CO₂ in ILs

Entry	ILs	H CO 2 ( MPa )	ΔG (kJ mol⁻¹)
Entry	ILs	H CO 2 ( MPa )	BAR method	COSMOtherm
1	H₂O	342.6	3.80 ± 0.10	0.54
2	[EMPyr][bFAP]	1.74	−10.18 ± 0.37	−4.26
3	[BEIM][bFAP]	1.46	−10.43 ± 0.34	−4.44
4	[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]	1.16	−11.37 ± 0.75	−4.84
5	[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]	0.86	−12.21 ± 0.08	−4.86

Though the four ILs could dissolve CO₂ more easily than water, it was concluded that there were different CO₂ solubility capabilities among the four selected ILs. Though the values of ΔG obtained by COSMOtherm were much smaller than that obtained by the BAR method, they all showed the same trend. The solvation free energy of CO₂ in studied ILs followed the increasing order: [EMPyr][bFAP] < [BEIM][bFAP] < [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP] < [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], which agrees with the relative CO₂ solubility predicted by COSMOtherm.

4.2 Structural properties

Some important structural properties of the simulated systems were investigated through MD simulations. The density, solvent-accessible area (SAS), and free volume (FV) of all simulated systems are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2

Calculated density and other properties for the simulated systems

System	Density (g cm⁻³)	SAS (m² cm⁻³)	FV (%)	V (nm³ mol⁻¹)
IL
[BEIM][bFAP]	1.752	45	35.99	109
[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]	1.431	81	38.03	162
[EMPyr][bFAP]	1.844	62	36.05	99
[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]	1.706	67	36.01	114
IL/CO₂
[BEIM][bFAP]/CO₂	1.697			113
[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]/CO₂	1.357			165
[EMPyr][bFAP]/CO₂	1.774			103
[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]/CO₂	1.660			119

The maximum density corresponds to [EMPyr][bFAP] (1.844 g cm⁻³), and the minimum density corresponds to [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP] (1.431 g cm⁻³). It was noticed that the density of the IL/CO₂ binary system was a little smaller than that of the corresponding pure IL. FV within ILs was correlated to the gas solubility. CO₂ molecules were preferentially solvated within the vicinity of the anions [41]. Figure 2 shows the representative vicinity within ILs. It was noticed that the four ILs with bFAP anion all had a larger FV of more than 35%. The larger the FV was, the more CO₂ molecules were solvated. It was consistence with the CO₂ solubility in the four ILs.

Figure 2

Representative snapshot of the FV space (green) within bFAP-based ILs: (a) [BEIM][bFAP], (b) [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], (c) [EMPyr][bFAP], and (d)[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP].

4.3 Radial distribution function of ILs and ILs/CO₂ system

To study the influence of CO₂ absorption on the overall IL structure, the equilibrium structures of ILs and CO₂ are presented by the radial distribution function g(r). The g(r) of the constituent compounds are calculated to study cation–anion, cation–cation, and anion–anion interactions in IL and shown from a to c in Figure 3. The g(r) of cation, anion, and CO₂ in the ILs/CO₂ system is also calculated and shown from (d) to (i) in Figure 3.

Figure 3

Radial distribution functions in ILs and IL/CO₂ systems at 298 K and 100 kPa: (a) cation–anion in IL, (b) cation–cation in IL, (c) anion–anion in IL, (d) cation–anion in IL/CO₂, (e) cation–cation in IL/CO₂, (f) anion–anion in IL/CO₂, (g) CO₂–cation in IL/CO₂, (h) CO₂–anion in IL/CO₂, and (i) CO₂–CO₂ in IL/CO₂.

The g(r) provided deep insights into the interactions that occurred in the studied system. It was revealed from Figure 3(a–c) that cation–anion interaction of both ILs is stronger than those of cation–cation or anion–anion interactions. Figure 3a shows the interaction between the cation and anion in ILs. Similar observations were found that the weaker interaction between the cation and the anion affected the CO₂ solubility in ILs [42]. Taking [B(hex)₃][bFAP] as an example, the intense cation–anion g(r) peak appears at about 0.67 nm. The g(r) peak of cation–anion in [BEIM][bFAP] was about 0.56 nm, while in Figure 3b and c, the cation–cation and anion–anion g(r) of [B(hex)₃][bFAP] peaks appear at 1.20 and 1.10 nm, respectively. It was clear in Figure 3d that the cation–anion g(r) shape in IL/CO₂ systems did not change obviously compared with pure IL systems. It was consistent with the previous simulation studies which showed that the addition of CO₂ molecules does not change the structures of ILs [36,43]. The interactions between CO₂ and ILs ions are shown in Figure 3(g and h). The CO₂–anion interactions in the four IL/systems all display g(r) peaks at 0.54 nm. It is obvious that CO₂ molecules are interacting stronger with the anions as compared with the cations since the CO₂–anion peak is located at a lower distance than that of the CO₂–cation peak.

The electrostatic and the van der Waals energies between ions and CO₂ interactions were also computed from the MD simulation systems and are listed in Table 3.

Table 3

Electrostatic and the van der Waals interaction energies computed from MD simulation (kJ mol⁻¹)

System	Electrostatic interaction (Coulomb)					Van der Waals interaction (LJ)
System	[c]…[c]	[c]…[a]	[a]…[a]	[c]…CO₂	[a]…CO₂	[c]…[c]	[c]…[a]	[a]…[a]	[c]…CO₂	[a]…CO₂
[BEIM][bFAP]/CO₂	43651.3	−95239.5	188,402	−120.28	−6.47	−4389.09	−29561.8	9993.66	−105.28	−266.25
[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]/CO₂	288,630	−537,241	408,878	−64.85	−6.33	−18377.8	−43958.1	18228.7	−171.65	−189.98
[EMPyr][bFAP]/CO₂	292,123	−614,795	449,418	−125.76	9.85	−1764.45	−23068.1	7274.88	−78.19	−282.65
[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]/CO₂	346,539	−761,467	521,422	−81.92	−3.97	−6261.04	−30233	10860.8	−117.08	−244.85

For IL and IL/CO₂ systems, the total interaction energies of cation–cation and anion–anion mainly showed unfavorable interactions. As for cation–anion, it was favorable interaction and electrostatic interaction made more contributions to the total interaction than Van der Waals interaction. Electrostatic interaction of cation and CO₂ was larger than that of anion and CO₂. Van der Waal’s interaction of anion and CO₂ was larger than that of cation and CO₂. It showed that the interaction of cation and CO₂ was mainly electrostatic interaction, while the interaction of anion and CO₂ was mainly Van der Waals interaction.

4.4 Mean-squared displacement (MSD) and Diffusion coefficients

The dynamic properties of ILs and IL/CO₂ systems are quantified using MSD and diffusivity. Figure 4(a–e) show the MSDs of cation, anion, and CO₂ in ILs and ILs/CO₂ at 298 K.

Figure 4

Comparison of the mean square displacement of of cations, anions, and CO₂ in IL and IL/CO₂ at 298 K: (a) [BEIM] and [bFAP] in pure [BEIM][bFAP], (b) [B(Hex)₃P] and [bFAP] in pure [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], (c) [EMPyr] and [bFAP] in pure [EMPyr][bFAP], (d) [(Me)₅isobuGua] and [bFAP] in pure [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP], and (e) CO₂ in the four ILs.

The initial rapid increase in MSD within 1 ns showed that a longer simulation time was required to evaluate the self-diffusion coefficients of ions or CO₂ in both IL and IL/CO₂ systems. The slopes of the MSDs for the cations are steeper than those for the anions in IL and IL/CO₂ systems. It was possibly due to the fact that a larger anion size resulted in a slower movement than the cation.

The diffusion of cation, anion, and CO₂ in ILs and ILs/CO₂ systems has also been determined. The diffusion coefficients of the constituent compounds were obtained by the linear fitting of the slope of MSD. Table 4 reports the diffusivities of cations, anions, and CO₂ in the system.

Table 4

Diffusion coefficient of cation, anion, and CO₂ at 298 K and 100 kPa

System	Diffusion coefficient (10⁻⁸cm²s⁻¹)
System	D _cation	D _anion	D CO 2
IL
[BEIM][bFAP]	0.55	0.41
[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]	0.68	0.57
[EMPyr][bFAP]	0.56	0.15
[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]	1.19	0.46
IL/CO₂
[BEIM][bFAP]/CO₂	0.60	0.27	9.93
[B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]/CO₂	0.41	0.31	13.9
[EMPyr][bFAP]/CO₂	1.06	0.39	7.16
[(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]/CO₂	1.15	0.21	9.65

The diffusion of cation, anion, and CO₂ in ILs and ILs/CO₂ systems have also been determined. The diffusion coefficients of the constituent compounds were obtained by the linear fitting of the slope of MSD. Table 4 reports the diffusivities of cations, anions, and CO₂ in the system. When CO₂ molecules were dissolved in the IL, it was synergistic competition. It is clear from Table 4 that the diffusion coefficient of CO₂ was much higher than those of cations and anions. It was mainly due to the small size of CO₂ molecules. For CO₂ molecule in IL/CO₂ system, the self-diffusion coefficient followed the decreasing order: [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP]/CO₂ > [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP]/CO₂ > [BEIM][bFAP]/CO₂ > [EMPyr][bFAP]/CO₂, which agreed with the predicted CO₂ solubility in ILs.

5 Conclusion

Using COSMOtherm, 500 ILs were selected and screened to predict the CO₂ solubility at 298 K and 100 kPa. CO₂ solubility in various ILs is much different. Among the 500 screened ILs, CO₂ solubility is in the range of 0.002 and 0.084 mole fraction. Anions have much more effect on the solubility of CO₂ than cations. ILs with bFAP anion could dissolve more CO₂ than any other ILs. The molecular understanding of structural properties of ILs and ILs/CO₂ system was further studied using MD simulation. The calculated results of CO₂ solvation free energy were −10.18 kJ mol⁻¹ in [EMPyr][bFAP], −11.37 kJ mol⁻¹ in [BEIM][bFAP], −12.21 kJ mol⁻¹ in [(Me)₅isobuGua][bFAP], and −10.43 kJ mol⁻¹ in [B(Hex)₃P][bFAP], respectively. In IL/CO₂ system, CO₂ molecules are interacting stronger with the anions as compared with the cations according to the analysis of g(r). The interaction of anion and CO₂ is mainly from Van der Waals interaction. The more dissolved in ILs CO₂ molecules are, the greater the self-diffusion coefficient is. Basically, the self-diffusion coefficient of cation is higher than that of anion in the IL and IL/CO₂ system.

Funding information: This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 52073228 and No. 22002117). The authors also appreciate the modern analysis and testing center of Xi’an Shiyou University for its hyper computation service.
Author contributions: Conceptualization, Xingang Jia; methodology, Xiaoling Hu; software, Xingang Jia; validation, Kehe Su; formal analysis, Xingang Jia; investigation, Xiaoling Hu; re-sources, Wenzhen Wang; data curation, Chunbao Du; writing – original draft preparation, Xingang Jia; writing – review and editing, Kehe Su; visualization, Xingang Jia; supervision, Xiaoling Hu; project administration, Xiaoling Hu and Wenzhen Wang; funding acquisition, Wenzheng Wang and Chunbao Du. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Conflict of interest: Authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.
Data availability statement: All CO₂ solubility in 500 ILs predicted by COSMOtherm and the structures of cations and anions are included in supplementary information files.

References

[1] Dong Q, Wang W, Kunkel KE, Shao Q, Xing W, Wei J. Heterogeneous response of global precipitation concentration to global warming. Int J Climatol. 2021;41:2347–12.10.1002/joc.6851Suche in Google Scholar

[2] Rogelj J, Geden O, Cowie A, Reisinger A. Three ways to improve net-zero emissions targets. Nature. 2021;591(7850):365–3.10.1038/d41586-021-00662-3Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] IPCC. Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In: Core writing team, RK Pachauri, LA Meyer, editors. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC; 2014. p. 151.Suche in Google Scholar

[4] Yun L, Hui T, Buda S, Zbigniew WK, Tong J. Impacts of 1.5 and 2°C global warming on winter snow depth in Central Asia. Sci Total Environ. 2019;651(2):2866–7.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.126Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[5] Blanchard LA, Hancu D, Beckman EJ, Brennecke JF. Green processing using ionic liquids and CO2. Nature. 1999;399:28–31.10.1038/19887Suche in Google Scholar

[6] Junhua H, Thomas R. Why are ionic liquids attractive for CO2 absorption? An overview. Aust J Chem. 2009;62(4):298–10.10.1071/CH08559Suche in Google Scholar

[7] Gurkan BE, de la Fuente JC, Mindrup EM, Ficke LE, Goodrich BF, Price EA, et al. Equimolar CO2 absorption by anion-functionalized ionic liquids. J Am Chem Soc. 2010;132(7):2116–7.10.1021/ja909305tSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[8] Gonzalez-Miquel M, Bedia J, Abrusci C, Palomar J, Rodriguez F. Anion effects on kinetics and thermodynamics of CO2 absorption in ionic liquids. J Phys Chem B. 2013;117(12):3398–8.10.1021/jp4007679Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Qiwei Y, Zhiping W, Zongbi B, Zhiguo Z, Yiwen Y, Qilong R, et al. New insights into CO2 absorption mechanisms with amino‐acid ionic liquids. ChemSusChem. 2016;9(8):806–6.10.1002/cssc.201501691Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[10] Yuan S, ChenYJi, X, Yang Z, Lu X. Experimental study of CO2 absorption in aqueous cholinium-based ionic liquids. Fluid Phase Equilibria. 2017;445:14–10.10.1016/j.fluid.2017.04.001Suche in Google Scholar

[11] Aki SNK, Mellein BR, Saurer EM, Brennecke JF. High-pressure phase behavior of carbon dioxide with imidazolium-based ionic liquids. J Phys Chem B. 2004;108(52):20355–10.10.1021/jp046895+Suche in Google Scholar

[12] Pankaj S, Soo-Hyun C, Sang-Do P, Il-Hyun B, Gil-Sun L. Selective chemical separation of carbondioxide by ether functionalized imidazolium cation based ionic liquids. Chem Eng J. 2012;181–182:834–7.10.1016/j.cej.2011.12.024Suche in Google Scholar

[13] Pankaj S, Sang Do PKTP, Sung CN, Soon KJ, Yeo IY, Baek IH. Solubility of carbon dioxide in amine-functionalized ionic liquids: role of the anions. Chem Eng J. 2012;193–194:267–8.10.1016/j.cej.2012.04.015Suche in Google Scholar

[14] Huang J, Rüther T. Why are ionic liquids attractive for CO2 absorption? An overview. Aust J Chem. 2009;62(4):298–10.10.1071/CH08559Suche in Google Scholar

[15] Yokozeki A, Shiflett MB, Junk CP, Grieco LM, Foo T. Physical and chemical absorptions of carbon dioxide in room temperature ionic liquids. J Phys Chem B. 2008;112(51):16654–9.10.1021/jp805784uSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[16] Earle MJ, Seddon KR. Ionic liquids. Green solvents for the future. Pure Appl Chem. 2000;72(7):1391–7.10.1021/bk-2002-0819.ch002Suche in Google Scholar

[17] Klamt A. COSMO-RS: from quantum chemistry to fluid phase thermodynamics and drug design. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2005.Suche in Google Scholar

[18] Palomar J, Torrecilla JS, Ferro VR, Rodríguez F. Development of a priori ionic liquid design tool. 1. Integration of a novel COSMO-RS molecular descriptor on neural networks. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2008;47:4523–9.10.1021/ie800056qSuche in Google Scholar

[19] Palomar J, Ferro VL, Torrecilla JS, Rodriguez F. Density and molar volume predictions using COSMO-RS for ionic liquids. An map proach to solvent design. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2007;46(18):6041–7.10.1021/ie070445xSuche in Google Scholar

[20] Diedenhofen M, Klamt A, Marsh K, Schafer A. Prediction of the vapor pressure and vaporization enthalpy of 1-n-alkyl-3-methylimidazolium-bis-(trifluoromethanesulfonyl) amide ionic liquids. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2007;9(33):4653–3.10.1039/b706728cSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] Diedenhofen M, Klamt A. COSMO-RS as a tool for property prediction of IL mixtures – a review. Fluid Phase Equilibria. 2010;294(1–2):31–7.10.1016/j.fluid.2010.02.002Suche in Google Scholar

[22] Liu H, Dai S, Jiang DE. Molecular dynamics simulation of anion effect on solubility, diffusivity, and permeability of carbon dioxide in ionic liquids. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2014;53(25):10485–90.10.1021/ie501501kSuche in Google Scholar

[23] Stevanovic S, Podgorsek A, Moura L, Santini CC, Padua AA, Gomes MC. Absorption of carbon dioxide by ionic liquids with carboxylate anions. Int J Green Gas Con. 2013;17:78–10.10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.04.017Suche in Google Scholar

[24] Yang Q, Achenie LEK. Exploration of bulk and interface behavior of gas molecules and 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate ionic liquid using equilibrium and nonequilibrium molecular dynamics simulation and quantum chemical calculation. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2018;20(15):10121–10.10.1039/C7CP07714ASuche in Google Scholar

[25] Palomar J, Gonzalez-Miquel M, Polo A, Rodriguez F. Understanding the physical absorption of CO2 in ionic liquids using the COSMO-RS method. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2011;50(6):3452–11.10.1021/ie101572mSuche in Google Scholar

[26] Abraham MJ, Murtola T, Schulz R, Pall S, Smith JC, Hess B, et al. GROMACS:high performance molecular simulations through multi-level parallelism from laptops to supercomputers. Software X. 2015;1–2:19–25.10.1016/j.softx.2015.06.001Suche in Google Scholar

[27] Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, et al. Gaussian 16, Revision B.01. Wallingford CT: Gaussian, Inc; 2016.Suche in Google Scholar

[28] Bayly CI, Cieplak P, Cornell W, Kollman PA. A well-behaved electrostatic potential based method using charge restraints for deriving atomic charges: the RESP model. J Chem Phys. 1993;97(40):10269–11.10.1021/j100142a004Suche in Google Scholar

[29] Tian L, Feiwu C. Multiwfn: a multifunctional wavefunction analyzer. J Comput Chem. 2012;33(5):580–12.10.1002/jcc.22885Suche in Google Scholar

[30] Sousda D, Silva AW, Vranken WF. ACPYPE – Antechamber python parser interface. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:367.10.1186/1756-0500-5-367Suche in Google Scholar

[31] Parrinello M, Rahman A. Polymorphic transitions in single crystals: a new molecular dynamics method. J Appl Phys. 1981;52(12):7182–8.10.1063/1.328693Suche in Google Scholar

[32] Bussi G, Donadio D, Parrinello M. Canonical sampling through velocity rescaling. J Chem Phys. 2007;126(1):014101.10.1063/1.2408420Suche in Google Scholar

[33] Hess B, Bekker H, Berendsen HJ, Fraaije JG. LINCS: a linear constraint solver for molecular simulations. J Comput Chem. 1997;18(12):1463–9.10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(199709)18:12<1463::AID-JCC4>3.0.CO;2-HSuche in Google Scholar

[34] Darden T, Perera L, Li L, Pedersen L. New tricks for modelers from the crystallography toolkit: the particle mesh Ewald algorithm and its use in nucleic acid simulations. Structure. 1999;7(3):R55–60.10.1016/S0969-2126(99)80033-1Suche in Google Scholar

[35] Muldoon MJ, Aki SNVK, Anderson JL, Dixon JK, Brennecke JF. Improving carbon dioxide solubility in ionic liquids. J Phys Chem B. 2007;111(30):9001–8.10.1021/jp071897qSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[36] Cadena C, Anthony JL, Shah JK, Morrow TI, Brennecke JF, Maginn EJ. Why is CO2 so soluble in imidazolium-based ionic liquids? J Am Chem Soc. 2004;126(16):5300–8.10.1021/ja039615xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[37] Sistla YS, Jain L, Khanna A. Validation and prediction of solubility parameters of ionic liquids for CO2 capture. Sep Purif Technol. 2012;97:51–64.10.1016/j.seppur.2012.01.050Suche in Google Scholar

[38] Mahurin SM, Lee JS, Baker GA, Luo H, Dai S. Performance of nitrile-containing anions in task-specific ionic liquids for improved CO2/N2 separation. J Memberane Sci. 2010;353(1–2):177–6.10.1016/j.memsci.2010.02.045Suche in Google Scholar

[39] Mahurin SM, Hillesheim PC, Yeary JS, Jiang DE, Dai S. High CO2 solubility, permeability and selectivity in ionic liquids with the tetracyanoborate anion. RSC Adv. 2012;2(31):11813–6.10.1039/c2ra22342bSuche in Google Scholar

[40] Martínez L, Andrade R, Birgin EG, Martínez JM. PACKMOL: a package for building initial configurations for molecular dynamics simulations. J Comput Chem. 2009;30(13):2157–7.10.1002/jcc.21224Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[41] Kanakubo M, Umecky T, Hiejima Y, Aizawa T, Nanjo H, Kameda Y. Solution structures of 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ionic liquid saturated with CO2: experimental evidence of specific anion−CO2 interaction. J Phys Chem B. 2005;109:13847–3.10.1021/jp052354oSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[42] Babarao R, Sheng D, Jiang D. Understanding the high solubility of CO2 in an ionic liquid with the tetracyanoborate anion. J Phys Chem B. 2011;115(32):9789–5.10.1021/jp205399rSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[43] Zhang X, Huo F, Liu Z, Wang W, Shi W, Maginn EJ. Absorption of CO2 in the ionic liquid 1-n-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium tris (pentafluoroethyl) trifluorophosphate ([hmim][FEP]): a molecular view by computer simulations. J Phys Chem B. 2009;113(21):7591–7.10.1021/jp900403qSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2022-01-02

Revised: 2022-03-22

Accepted: 2022-04-04

Published Online: 2022-04-28

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Supplementary material

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.1515/chem-2022-0154

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

ionic liquid; CO2 absorption; screening; molecular dynamics

Creative Commons

BY 4.0

Molecular screening of ionic liquids for CO2 absorption and molecular dynamic simulation

Artikel

Abstract

1 Introduction

2 Methods

2.1 Screened ILs and COSMO-RS calculations

2.2 Molecular dynamics simulations

3 Solubility data and simulation models

3.1 CO2 solubility in ILs

3.2 MD simulations of ILs and ILs/CO2

4 Results and discussions

4.1 Henry constant and solvation free energy of CO2 in ILs

4.2 Structural properties

4.3 Radial distribution function of ILs and ILs/CO2 system

4.4 Mean-squared displacement (MSD) and Diffusion coefficients

5 Conclusion

References

Zusatzmaterial

Artikel in diesem Heft

Artikel in diesem Heft

Artikel in diesem Heft

Molecular screening of ionic liquids for CO₂ absorption and molecular dynamic simulation

3.1 CO₂ solubility in ILs

3.2 MD simulations of ILs and ILs/CO₂

4.1 Henry constant and solvation free energy of CO₂ in ILs

4.3 Radial distribution function of ILs and ILs/CO₂ system