Stoichiometric reduction of CO2 to CO by aluminum-based frustrated Lewis pairs

Article abstract of DOI:10.1002/anie.201103600

Reducing frustration: The reaction of Mes₃P(CO ₂)(AlI₃)₂ in the presence of a CO₂ atmosphere results in the formation of Mes₃P(CO₂) (O(AlI₂)₂)(AlI₃) and [Mes₃PI] [AlI₄] (Mes=2,4,6-Me₃C₆H₂) with the evolution of CO.

Full text of DOI:10.1002/anie.201103600

Communications
DOI: 10.1002/anie.201103600
CO2 Reduction
Stoichiometric Reduction of CO2 to CO by Aluminum-Based
Frustrated Lewis Pairs**
Gabriel Mꢀnard and Douglas W. Stephan*
The dramatic rise in the consumption of fossil fuels since the
industrial revolution has resulted in rapid increases in
atmospheric CO2 levels, exacerbating global climate
change.[1] While mitigating emissions through reduced con-
sumption and improved efficiency will most likely offer the
best solutions, technologies such as carbon capture and
storage continue to be developed in the hopes of eliminating
some industrial emissions.[2] In addition to the environmental
motivation, the rising costs and dwindling supplies of fossil
fuels have prompted efforts to develop alternative energy
sources. While this has generated a number of clever
innovations in energy technology,[3–8] one approach that has
garnered attention and addresses both the environmental and
alternative energy issues is based on the concept of utilizing
CO2 as a C1 source for fuels. Indeed, one perturbation of this
idea is the “methanol economy” espoused by Olah some
10 years ago.[9,10] To avoid further environmental issues and
deal with thermodynamic realities, this vision requires the
reduction of CO2 by photochemically generated H2.[11,12]
While intense efforts are targeting the photocatalytic splitting
of water,[13,14] recent efforts have targeted fundamentally new
main-group-mediated routes to the reduction chemistry of
CO2.[15–18]
Recently, we have been exploiting the concept of “frus-
trated Lewis pairs” (FLPs) for the activation of a variety of
small molecules.[19–22] In particular, we have shown that
systems derived from sterically demanding phosphines and
boranes are capable of reversibly binding CO2.[23] Subse-
quently, we showed that FLPs derived from aluminum halides
(X = Cl or Br) and PMes3 (Mes = 2,4,6-C6H2Me3) react with
CO2 to give the species Mes3PC(OAlX3)2 (X = Cl, Br).[16]
Treatment of these products with ammonia–borane
(H3NBH3) and subsequent hydrolysis resulted in the stoi-
chiometric reduction of CO2 to methanol. Herein, we report
that these P/Al/CO2 compounds also provide a pathway for
the reduction of CO2 to CO. Initial information regarding the
mechanism of this remarkably facile and metal-free reduction
are presented.
The species Mes3P(C(OAlI3)2 (1) was readily synthesized
in a similar fashion to chloride and bromide analogues
[Eq. (1)].[16] The compound is isolated by precipitation after
5 minutes following the combination of the reagents. The
27Al NMR resonance for 1 is observed at 20 ppm and is
markedly upfield from those of Mes3PC(OAlX3)2 (X = Cl,
Br), which is consistent with literature values of 27Al shifts for
aluminum halides.[24] Allowing the initial reaction mixture of
PMes3 and AlI3 to stir under CO2 for 16 h afforded two new
compounds 2 and 3 in a 1:1 ratio, as evidenced by 31P NMR
spectroscopy. The 31P NMR resonance for 2 was observed at
20 ppm, exhibiting P C coupling of 118 Hz. 27Al NMR
ꢀ
spectroscopy showed a broad peak at 31 ppm (u1/2 = ca.
170 Hz), which is slightly downfield from the starting material
1 at 20 ppm. Crystals of the product 2 were also obtained and
were shown to be Mes3P(C(OAlI2)2O)(AlI3) (Figure 1). This
[*] G. Mꢀnard, Prof. Dr. D. W. Stephan
Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto
80 St. George St. Toronto Ontario, M5S 3H6 (Canada)
E-mail: dstephan@chem.utoronto.ca
Homepage: http://www.chem.utoronto.ca/staff/DSTEPHAN
[**] D.W.S. gratefully acknowledges the financial support of NSERC of
Canada, the award of a Canada Research Chair, and a Killam
Research Fellowship. G.M. is grateful for the support of an NSERC
and a William Sumner Fellowship. Dr. Zachariah Heiden is thanked
for helpful discussions.
Supporting information for this article is available on the WWW
under http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/anie.201103600.
Figure 1. POV-ray depiction of 2. H atoms are omitted for clarity.
8396
ꢀ 2011 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 8396 –8399

product contains a six-membered ring comprised of a CO2
fragment linked to an I2AlOAlI2 fragment. PMes3 is carbon-
bound in an exocyclic position, while an additional equivalent
AlBr3, and Br2. This latter species gave rise to a 31P{1H} NMR
shift at 38.5 ppm and an 27Al NMR signal at 81 ppm.
Compounds 4 and 5 were also characterized crystallograph-
ically (see the Supporting Information). In the case of 4, the
geometry was almost identical to that described above for 2,
ꢀ
of AlI3 is bound to the transannular oxygen atom. The P C
distance of 1.906(5) ꢀ is similar to that previously reported in
Mes3P(C(OAlX3)2 (X = Cl, Br).[16] The C O and related Al
O distances were found to be 1.241(5) ꢀ and 1.261(4) ꢀ and
with the Al O bond lengths to the PCO2 fragment being
ꢀ
ꢀ
ꢀ
ꢀ
1.837(3) ꢀ and 1.840(3) ꢀ, while the Al O bond lengths in
ꢀ
1.847(3) ꢀ and 1.860(3) ꢀ, respectively. The Al O distances
the Br2AlOAlBr2 fragment are 1.792(3) ꢀ and 1.795(3) ꢀ.
While spectroscopic data suggested the formation of the
chloride analogue may occur, the prolonged heating of PMes3
and AlCl3 under CO2 led to a mixture of products that were
not separable.
in the I2AlOAlI2 fragment were 1.806(3) and 1.811(3) ꢀ while
ꢀ
the O AlI3 distance is longer (1.831(3) ꢀ) consistent with the
nature of this dative bond. It is noteworthy that while the X-
ray data confirm the presence of two distinct Al environments
in 2, 27Al NMR data showed only a single broad resonance. As
dissymmetric aluminum centers often give broad resonances,
this could arise from overlapping signals. Alternatively, a
fluxional process could account for this observation. How-
ever, the poor solubility of 2 precluded acquisition of
27Al NMR spectral data at low temperature.
Efforts to garner some insight into the mechanism of this
reduction were undertaken. Monitoring solutions of PMes3
and AlX3 (X = Br, I) by 31P{1H} NMR spectroscopy showed
only a broad resonance attributable to the formation of weak
donor–acceptor adducts in rapid exchange with excess AlX3.
Upon exposure to CO2, there is rapid and near quantitative
generation of the initial species Mes3PC(OAlX3)2 as the only
observable product. Subsequent monitoring of these reac-
tions over time showed the decline of the resonances from
Mes3PC(OAlX3)2 and the appearance of the peaks resulting
from the corresponding products 2/3 and 4/5 as the exclusive
products (Figure 2).
The additional product 3 gives rise to a 31P NMR
resonance at ꢀ15 ppm and a sharp 27Al NMR singlet at
ꢀ25 ppm. These data are consistent with the formulation of
the product 3 as the salt [Mes3PI][AlI4]. This was confirmed
by a crystallographic study of crystals obtained from the
reaction mixture (see the Supporting Information), while 3
was also prepared independently from the reaction of PMes3,
AlI3, and I2.
The capture of oxide and consequent formation of the Al-
O-Al fragment in 2, infer the reduction of CO2 to CO.
Infrared spectroscopy of the headspace gas revealed an
absorption centered at 2143 cmꢀ1 [25]
confirming CO is
,
produced in this reaction. Employing 13CO2 the reaction was
shown to generate a new peak at 184.5 ppm in the 13C NMR
spectrum while the corresponding headspace gas gave rise to
an absorption centered at 2096 cmꢀ1. These data are the
spectroscopic signatures of 13CO and this was confirmed by
comparison to those of an authentic sample. The liberated CO
was captured by exposure of the head gas to a solution of
[Cp*RuCl(PCy3)],[26]
prompting
the
formation
of
[Cp*Ru(CO)Cl(PCy3)] in 80% yield based on the stoichiom-
etry in which one equivalent of CO arises from reaction of
two equivalents of phosphine [Eq. (3)]. Collectively, these
data imply that the reaction of two equivalents of phosphine
and CO2 react with four equivalents of AlI3 to produce one
equivalent of 2, 3, and CO [Eq. (2)]. The reduction of CO2 to
CO and the oxide that is incorporated in 2 is concurrent with
formal oxidation of phosphine to iodophosphonium, generat-
ing the salt 3.
The analogous reaction of PMes3 and AlBr3 was also
performed. In a similar fashion exposure of the solution to
CO2 for 2 days at 258C afforded a mixture of two products 4
and 5 in a 1:1 ratio. Vapor diffusion of cyclohexane into the
bromobenzene solution afforded crystals of Mes3P(C-
(OAlBr2)2O)(AlBr3) 4. This product exhibited a 31P{1H}
NMR signal at 19.5 ppm while a broad 27Al NMR resonance
was observed at 88 ppm. Employing 13CO2 the species [13C]-4
Figure 2. 31P{1H} NMR spectra of PMes3 and two equivalents of AlBr3.
These spectral data seem to imply that the species 1 and
Mes3PC(OAlBr3)2 are intermediates en route to 2 and 3 and 4
and 5, respectively. However, it is noteworthy that when 1 is
isolated, this species is found to be stable at room temperature
under atmospheres of N2 or CO2. Only at elevated temper-
ature under CO2 was the conversion of isolated 1 into 2 and 3
observed. Similarly, exposure of a solution of [12C]-1 to a
13CO2 atmosphere showed no evidence of CO2 exchange into
1 at room temperature. It is proposed that the reaction is
initiated by thermal dissociation of AlX3 from 1 or Mes3PC-
(OAlBr3)2 to generate the species Mes3PCO2AlX3. Such a
species would be analogous to the previously reported and
thermally unstable species tBu3PCO2B(C6F5)3.[23] The inabil-
ꢀ
was prepared and a resonance at 176.8 ppm with a P C
coupling constant of 123 Hz was seen in the 13C NMR
spectrum. The second product 5 was confirmed to be the
salt [Mes3PBr][AlBr4] by independent synthesis from PMes3,
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 8396 –8399
ꢀ 2011 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.angewandte.org
8397

Communications
ity to observe or isolate this transient species is consistent with
and AlI3 for conversion of 1 into 2, the precise details of the
conversion of 1 to 2 and 3 continue to be the subject of
investigation.
In summary, we have described the room-temperature
conversion of CO2 into CO mediated by Al/P-based FLPs.
The precise mechanistic details of the concurrent capture of
the oxide in Mes3P(C(OAlX2)2O)(AlX3) continues to be the
subject of study. Furthermore, we are targeting new systems
for the catalytic reduction of CO2.
a recent computational report that shows Mes3PCO2AlCl3 is
about 35 kcalmolꢀ1 less stable than Mes3PC(OAlCl3)2.[27]
Further support for this postulate was derived from treatment
of [13C]-1 with excess PMes3 under N2. This resulted in the
appearance of a broad 31P NMR resonance attributable to the
adduct Mes3P(AlI3) in rapid exchange. Furthermore, a new
albeit weak resonance at 7 ppm was observed. The observa-
tion of a P–13C coupling of 120 MHz is consistent with the
retention of the Mes3PCO2 fragment. While it is tempting to
suggest that this transient species is Mes3PCO2AlI3, all efforts
to prepare or isolate this minor product were unsuccessful.
The experimentally observed reaction rates of formation
of Mes3P(C(OAlX2)2O)(AlX3) qualitatively follow the trend
I > Br> Cl. This suggests the barrier to reaction of Mes3PC-
(OAlX3)2 increases with increasing Lewis acidity of AlX3. In
stark contrast to the rapid formation of Mes3P(C(OAlX3)2
(X = Cl, Br, I), the analogous chemistry with P(o-tol)3, AlI3,
and CO2 led to the very slow generation of the species (o-
tol)3PC(OAlI3)2 (6). Furthermore, only on heating to 908C
under CO2 was 6 seen to begin to react further. The slow
formation of 6 and subsequent reaction with additional CO2
are attributed to the greater stability of the Lewis acid-base
adduct (o-tol)3P(AlI3) (7).
Experimental Section
All manipulations were performed under an atmosphere of dry,
oxygen-free N2 by means of standard Schlenk or glovebox techniques
(Innovative Technology glovebox equipped with a ꢀ358C freezer).
NMR spectra were obtained on a Bruker Avance 400 MHz or a
Varian NMR system 400 MHz spectrometer and spectra were
referenced to residual solvent or an external reference. Chemical
shifts (d) are given in ppm and absolute values of the coupling
constants are in Hz. IR spectra were collected on a Perkin–Elmer
Spectrum One FT-IR instrument using a G-2 gas cell (10 cm long).
Elemental analyses (C, H) were performed in house. The compound
[Cp*RuCl(PCy3)] was synthesized from [(Cp*RuCl)2] and PCy3 by a
literature procedure.[28]
Mes3PC(OAlI3)2 (1): The compound was synthesized in an
analogous manner to the previously reported Mes3P(CO2)(AlX3)2
(X = Cl, Br);[16] however, the compound was worked up 5 min. after
addition of CO2 to the FLP solution. The compound could be
synthesized by combining PMes3 (0.500 g, 1.29 mmol) and AlI3
(1.05 g, 2.58 mmol) in bromobenzene (20 mL). Precipitation using
hexanes (ca. 20 mL) afforded a white solid, which was filtered and
dried on a frit. Yield of isolated product: 1.4 g (87%). 1H NMR
The solubility of 1 in C6H5Br was found to be dramatically
improved in the presence of the salt [Mes3PMe][AlI4] (8).
NMR data for a 1:1 mixture of 1 and 8 showed unchanged 31
P
signals but broadened 27Al resonances for the two species,
suggesting rapid iodide exchange may account for the
improved solubility. Exposing this combination of 1 and 8 to
13CO2 prompts the formation of 2 and 3 at room temperature
in approximately 5 h. The liberation of 13CO was evidenced by
13C NMR and FT-IR analysis however no appreciable 13C
incorporation into the CO2 fragment of the product 2 was
observed. This experiment was also confirmed in the reverse
sense as employing [13C]-1 gave [13C]-2 and no evidence of
liberated 13CO (Scheme 1). This demonstrates that the PCO2
4
4
(C6D5Br): d = 6.83 (d, JHꢀH = 4.4 Hz, 3H, m-Mes), 6.70 (d, JHꢀH
=
4.4 Hz, 3H, m-Mes), 2.48 (s, 9H, o-CH3Mes), 2.06 (s, 9H, p-CH3Mes),
1.90 ppm (s, 9H, o-CH3Mes). 31P{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 22.0 ppm.
27Al NMR (104 MHz, C6D5Br): d = 20 ppm (bs, u1/2 = ca. 1500 Hz).
13C{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 167.8 (d, JCꢀP = 119 Hz, CO2), 146.5 (d,
1
4JCꢀP = 3.0 Hz, p-C6H2), 144.9 (d, JCꢀP = 11.6 Hz, o-C6H2), 144.4 (d,
2
2JCꢀP = 10.3 Hz, o-C6H2), 134.5 (d, 3JCꢀP = 12.2 Hz, m-C6H2), 133.7 (d,
3JCꢀP = 12.5 Hz, m-C6H2), 115.0 (d, JCꢀP = 74.5 Hz, i-C6H2), 25.5 (d,
1
3JCꢀP = 5.7 Hz, o-CH3Mes), 23.9 (d, 3JCꢀP = 5.2 Hz, o-CH3Mes), 21.2 ppm
(d, 5JCꢀP = 1.5 Hz, p-CH3Mes). 31P{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 22.0 ppm
(d, 1JPꢀC = 119 Hz).
[Mes3PX][AlX4], X = I (3), X = Br (5): These species were
obtained in similar fashions and thus only one is detailed (see
Supporting Information for further details). A 50 mL round-bottom
Schlenk flask equipped with a magnetic stir bar was charged with
PMes3 (300 mg, 0.77 mmol) and AlI3 (315 mg, 0.77 mmol). Toluene
(20 mL) was added to this all at once. A solution of I2 (196 mg,
0.77 mmol) in toluene (ca. 5 mL) was then added dropwise to this
mixture. The mixture turned to a pale yellow oily solution and was
allowed to stir for 30 min. The solvent was removed in vacuo to obtain
a pale orange solid. The solid was stirred in hexanes (ca. 10 mL) for
10 min. and the mixture was filtered on a glass frit and washed with
Scheme 1. Labeling experiments for the formation of 2 and 3.
1
hexanes (ca. 5 mL) and dried (720 mg, 89%). 3: H NMR (C6D5Br):
fragment in 2 is derived from that in 1 and further that it is
exogenous CO2 that is reduced to CO and the oxygen atom in
2.
4
4
d = 6.82 (d, JHꢀP = 4.4 Hz, 3H, m-Mes), 6.63 (d, JHꢀP = 6.0 Hz, 3H,
m-Mes), 2.17 (s, 9H, o-CH3Mes), 2.12 (s, 9H, p-CH3Mes), 1.73 ppm (s,
9H, o-CH3Mes). 31P{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = ꢀ14.5 ppm. 27Al NMR
(C6D5Br): d = ꢀ25 ppm (s). 13C{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 146.4 (d,
Preliminary kinetic data were consistent with first-order
dependence of the formation of 2 and 3 on both 1 and 8.
Kinetic data were obtained over a 30 K range (288–318 K)
allowing the determination of the activation parameters:
2
4JCꢀP = 3.4 Hz, p-C6H2), 145.4 (d, JCꢀP = 11.8 Hz, o-C6H2), 143.4 (d,
2JCꢀP = 12.1 Hz, o-C6H2), 133.4 (d, 3JCꢀP = 12.3 Hz, m-C6H2), 132.9 (d,
1
3JCꢀP = 12.3 Hz, m-C6H2), 119.3 (d, JCꢀP = 65.5 Hz, i-C6H2), 26.3 (d,
3JCꢀP = 6.4 Hz, o-CH3Mes), 24.4 (d, 3JCꢀP = 4.3 Hz, o-CH3Mes), 21.4 ppm
(d, 5JCꢀP = 1.8 Hz, p-CH3Mes). 5: 1H NMR (C6D5Br): d = 6.87 (d,
4JHꢀP = 4.4 Hz, 3H, m-Mes), 6.71 (d, 4JHꢀP = 6.4 Hz, 3H, m-Mes), 2.14
(s, 9H, p-CH3Mes), 2.13 (s, 9H, o-CH3Mes), 1.76 ppm (s, 9H, o-CH3Mes).
¼
¼
DH = 82(2) kJmolꢀ1 and DS = ꢀ21(6) Jmolꢀ1 Kꢀ1. While
these data infer an associative mechanism, suggesting that
[AlI4]ꢀ prompts degradation of 1 to generate free phosphine
8398
www.angewandte.org
ꢀ 2011 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 8396 –8399

31P{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 38.5 ppm. 27Al NMR (C6D5Br): d =
Figure S3). Both flasks were open to each other and allowed to stir
for ca. 3 h. The solution containing the ruthenium complex was then
analyzed by 31P NMR spectroscopy and the ratios integrated (see the
4
81 ppm (s). 13C{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 147.2 (d, JCꢀP = 3.0 Hz, p-
C6H2), 145.4 (d, 2JCꢀP = 10.3 Hz, o-C6H2), 143.7 (d, 2JCꢀP = 15.4 Hz, o-
C6H2), 133.7 (d, 3JCꢀP = 12.1 Hz, m-C6H2), 133.2 (d, 3JCꢀP = 13.5 Hz, m-
Supporting Information), which indicated
[Cp*RuCl(PCy3)]:[Cp*RuCl(PCy3)(CO)].
a 61:39 mixture of
C6H2), 119.0 (d, 1JCꢀP = 74.4 Hz, i-C6H2), 24.9 (d, 3JCꢀP = 6.2 Hz, o-
5
CH3Mes), 24.4 (d, 3JCꢀP = 5.5 Hz, o-CH3Mes), 21.5 ppm (d, JCꢀP
=
1.5 Hz, p-CH3Mes).
Received: May 26, 2011
Revised: June 14, 2011
Published online: July 14, 2011
Generation of Mes3P(C(OAlI2)2O)(AlI3) (2) and [Mes3PI][AlI4]
(3) with reduction of CO2: A 100 mL Schlenk bomb equipped with a
Teflon cap and a magnetic stirbar in the glovebox was charged with
PMes3 (0.5 g, 1.29 mmol) and AlI3 (1.0 g, 2.45 mmol). Bromobenzene
(20 mL) or fluorobenzene (20 mL) was added to this all at once.
(NOTE: Product isolation was greatly facilitated by using fluoro-
benzene owing to its lower boiling point; however, the reaction was
faster in bromobenzene). The bomb was transferred to the Schlenk
line equipped with a CO2 outlet. The bomb was degassed at room
temperature, filled with CO2 (ca. 2 atm.), and sealed. The solution was
stirred rapidly overnight (ca. 16 h for bromobenzene) or for 4 days
(for fluorobenzene) in the glovebox, resulting in a change in color
from purple to dark yellow. The solvent was then removed in vacuo,
and hexanes (ca. 10 mL) was added to the residue. The precipitate
was rapidly stirred for about 10 min. and then filtered on a glass frit. A
1:1 mixture of 2 and 3 was obtained (1.35 g).
Keywords: aluminum · carbon dioxide · carbon monoxide ·
.
frustrated Lewis pairs · reduction
[1] IPCC. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, IPCC: Geneva,
2007.
[2] R. Banerjee, A. Phan, B. Wang, C. Knobler, H. Furukawa, M.
OꢁKeeffe, O. M. Yaghi, Science 2008, 319, 939.
[3] M. Bojic, AIP Conf. Proc. 2010, 1239, 12 – 21.
[4] W. D. Grossmann, I. Grossmann, K. Steininger, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2010, 44, 4849 – 4855.
[5] R. Kothari, V. V. Tyagi, A. Pathak, Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 3164 – 3170.
Isolation of 2 and 4: These species were obtained in a similar
manner and thus only one is detailed (see Supporting Information for
further details). Small portions of 2 could be separated from a 1:1
mixture of 2:3 (above) by slow cooling a fluorobenzene solution to
ꢀ388C. Crystals obtained were suitable for X-ray crystallography.
The crystals were partly soluble in deuterated bromobenzene. 2:
1H NMR C6D5Br): d = 7.09–6.83 (m, 7–8H, 1.5·C6H5F), 6.82 (bs, 3H,
m-Mes), 6.70 (bs, 3H, m-Mes), 2.33 (bs, 9H, o-CH3Mes), 2.06 (s, 9H, p-
CH3Mes), 1.83 ppm (bs, 9H, o-CH3Mes). 31P{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d =
19.5 ppm. 27Al NMR (104 MHz, C6D5Br): d = 31 ppm (bs, u1/2 = ca.
[6] A. M. Omer, Energy Costs Int. Dev. New Dir. 2009, 39 – 77.
[7] A. M. Omer, Int. J. Curr. Chem. 2010, 1, 31 – 62.
[8] J. Wadsworth, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2010, 41, 1047 – 1062.
[9] G. A. Olah, Angew. Chem. 2005, 117, 2692 – 2696; Angew. Chem.
Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 2636 – 2639.
[10] G. A. Olah, G. K. S. Prakash, A. Goeppert, J. Org. Chem. 2009,
74, 487 – 498.
[11] N. Kamiya, T. Ohta, Sol.-Hydrogen Energy Syst. 1979, 115 – 135.
[12] K. Sakai, H. Ozawa, Coord. Chem. Rev. 2007, 251, 2753 – 2766.
[13] J. M. Lehn, Int. Congr. Catal., [Proc.], 8th 1984, 1, I63 – I83.
[14] M. Navarro Yerga Rufino, M. C. Alvarez Galvan, F. del Valle,
A. Villoria de La Mano Jose, L. G. Fierro Jose, ChemSusChem
2009, 2, 471 – 485.
[15] A. E. Ashley, A. L. Thompson, D. OꢁHare, Angew. Chem. 2009,
121, 10023 – 10027; Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 9839 – 9843.
[16] G. Mꢂnard, D. W. Stephan, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 1796 –
1797.
1
170 Hz). 13C{1H} NMR (C6D5Br): d = 173.9 (d, JCꢀP = 118 Hz, CO2),
1
4
162.8 (d, JCꢀF = 244 Hz, i-C6H5F), 147.0 (d, JCꢀP = 3.0 Hz, p-C6H2),
144.7 (bs, 2C, o-C6H2), 133.5 (bs, 2C, m-C6H2), 130.0 (d, 3JCꢀF = 7.7 Hz,
m-C6H5F), 124.1 (d, 4JCꢀF = 3.1 Hz, p-C6H5F), 115.3 (d, JCꢀF
=
2
20.6 Hz, o-C6H5F), 113.6 (d, 1JCꢀP = 76.2 Hz, i-C6H2), 26.0 (bs, o-
CH3Mes), 23.8 (bs, o-CH3Mes), 21.3 ppm (s, p-CH3Mes). 19F NMR
(C6D5Br): d = ꢀ112.4 ppm. 4: 1H NMR (CD2Cl2): d = 7.52–7.24 (m,
5H, C6H5Br), 7.17 (bs, 6H, m-Mes), 2.41 (s, 9H, p-CH3Mes), 2.32 (bs,
9H, o-CH3Mes), 2.11 ppm (bs, 9H, o-CH3Mes). 31P{1H} NMR (CD2Cl2):
d = 19.5 ppm. 27Al NMR (104 MHz, CD2Cl2): d = 88 ppm (bs).
[17] A. Berkefeld, W. E. Piers, M. Parvez, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010,
132, 10660 – 10661.
13C{1H} NMR (CD2Cl2): d = 176.8 (d, JCꢀP = 123 Hz, CO2), 147.9 (d,
1
[18] L. Gu, Y. Zhang, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 914 – 915.
[19] D. W. Stephan, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2008, 6, 1535 – 1539.
[20] D. W. Stephan, Dalton Trans. 2009, 3129 – 3136.
[21] D. W. Stephan, Chem. Commun. 2010, 46, 8526 – 8533.
[22] D. W. Stephan, G. Erker, Angew. Chem. 2010, 122, 50 – 81;
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 46 – 76.
[23] C. M. Mçmming, E. Otten, G. Kehr, R. Frçhlich, S. Grimme,
D. W. Stephan, G. Erker, Angew. Chem. 2009, 121, 6770 – 6773;
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 6643 – 6646.
4JCꢀP = 3.0 Hz, p-C6H2), 145.5 (bd, JCꢀP = 11 Hz, o-C6H2), 134.0 (bd,
2
3JCꢀP = 12.4 Hz, m-C6H2), 131.9 (s, C6H5Br), 130.5 (s, C6H5Br), 127.4
(s, C6H5Br), 122.7 (s, C6H5Br), 113.7 (d, 1JCꢀP = 76.6 Hz, i-C6H2), 25.1
(bs, o-CH3Mes), 24.3 (bs, o-CH3Mes), 21.5 ppm (d, 5JCꢀP = 1.6 Hz, p-
CH3Mes).
Quantification of CO: A 50 mL Schlenk bomb equipped with a
Teflon cap and a magnetic stirbar in the glovebox was charged with
PMes3 (50 mg, 0.13 mmol) and AlI3 (100 mg, 0.24 mmol). Bromoben-
zene (2 mL) was added to this all at once. The bomb was transferred
to the Schlenk line equipped with a CO2 outlet. The bomb was
degassed at room temperature, filled with CO2 (ca. 2 atm.) and sealed.
The solution was stirred rapidly for ca. 16 h in the glovebox, and the
solution color changed from purple to dark yellow. A second 50 mL
Schlenk bomb equipped with a Teflon cap and a magnetic stirbar was
charged with [Cp*RuCl(PCy3)] (71 mg, 0.13 mmol) in [D8]toluene
(1 mL) and was attached to the outlet of the first Schlenk bomb by a
short piece of Tygon tubing (see the Supporting Information,
[24] E. R. Malinowski, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1969, 91, 4701.
[25] The diatomic CO gives rise to rotationally coupled IR absorp-
tions at 2172 and 2115 cmꢀ1, averaging 2143 cmꢀ1
.
[26] J. S. Silvia, C. C. Cummins, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 2169.
[27] H. J. Kwon, H. W. Kim, Y. M. Rhee, Chem. Eur. J. 2011, 17,
6501 – 6507.
[28] B. K. Campion, R. H. Heyn, T. D. Tilley, J. Chem. Soc. Chem.
Commun. 1988, 278 – 280.
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 8396 –8399
ꢀ 2011 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.angewandte.org 8399