Enantioseparation through liquid extraction technology is an emerging field, e.g., enantioseparations of amino acids (and derivatives thereof), amino alcohols, amines, and carboxylic acids have been reported. Often, when a new selector is developed, the versatility of substrate scope is investigated. From an industrial point of view, the problem is typically approached the other way around, and for a target racemate, a selector needs to be found in order to accomplish the desired enantioseparation. This study presents such a screening approach for the separation of the enantiomers of DL-¿-methyl phenylglycine amide (DL-¿-MPGA), a model amide racemate with high industrial relevance. Chiral selectors that were reported for other classes of racemates were investigated, i.e., several macrocyclic selectors and Pd-BINAP complexes. It appeared very challenging to obtain both high extraction yields and good enantioselectivity for most selectors, but Pd-BINAP-based selectors performed well, with enantioselectivities up to 7.4 with an extraction yield of the desired enantiomer of 95.8%. These high enantioselectivities were obtained using dichloromethane as solvent. Using less volatile chlorobenzene or 1-chloropentane, reasonable selectivities of up to 1.7 were measured, making these the best alternative solvents for dichloromethane. Chirality 27:123¿130, 2015@en

This paper discusses the conceptual process design for the integrated production of bio-based acetic acid, glycolaldehyde, and acetol from forest residue- and pine-derived pyrolysisoils. Aspen Plus®and Aspen Process Economic Analyzer were used for process simulationand estimating the equipment cost, respectively. The process was designed at a capacity200 kt pyrolysis oil per year, operating 8000 h annually, and involving extraction, distillation,and evaporation. It can isolate more than 99% of the glycolaldehyde and acetic acid andabout two-thirds of the acetol present in the oils. In comparison with the forest residue-based process (21 MD ), the pine-based process requires a higher capital investment of 23MD and a slightly higher production cost of 49 MD /a versus 48 MD /a, but can provide ahigher revenue of 57 MD /a instead of 44 MD /a because pine-derived pyrolysis oil containsmore acetic acid, glycolaldehyde, and acetol, which also makes it less sensitive to marketprice. Pine-derived pyrolysis oil is a preferable feedstock over forest residue-derived pyrolysisoil for an integrated chemical recovery process, whereas forest residue-derived pyrolysis oilgenerates no profit at an annual capacity of 50¿600 kt oil. The economic feasibility of thedesigned process is highly dependent on the glycolaldehyde content of the pyrolysis oil.@en