Spectroscopic, electrochemical and computational characterization of Ru species involved in catalytic water oxidation. Evidence for a [RuV(O)(Py2Metacn)] intermediate.

Abstract

A new family of ruthenium complexes based on the N‐pentadentate ligand Py2Metacn (N‐methyl‐N′,N′′‐bis(2‐picolyl)‐1,4,7‐triazacyclononane) has been synthesised and its catalytic activity has been studied in the water‐oxidation (WO) reaction. We have used chemical oxidants (ceric ammonium nitrate and NaIO4) to generate the WO intermediates [RuII(OH2)(Py2Metacn)]2+, [RuIII(OH2)(Py2Metacn)]3+, [RuIII(OH)(Py2Metacn)]2+ and [RuIV(O)(Py2Metacn)]2+, which have been characterised spectroscopically. Their relative redox and pH stability in water has been studied by using UV/Vis and NMR spectroscopies, HRMS and spectroelectrochemistry. [RuIV(O)(Py2Metacn)]2+ has a long half‐life (>48 h) in water. The catalytic cycle of WO has been elucidated by using kinetic, spectroscopic, 18O‐labelling and theoretical studies, and the conclusion is that the rate‐determining step is a single‐site water nucleophilic attack on a metal‐oxo species. Moreover, [RuIV(O)(Py2Metacn)]2+ is proposed to be the resting state under catalytic conditions. By monitoring CeIV consumption, we found that the O2 evolution rate is redox‐controlled and independent of the initial concentration of CeIV. Based on these facts, we propose herein that [RuIV(O)(Py2Metacn)]2+ is oxidised to [RuV(O)(Py2Metacn)]2+ prior to attack by a water molecule to give [RuIII(OOH)(Py2Metacn)]2+. Finally, it is shown that the difference in WO reactivity between the homologous iron and ruthenium [M(OH2)(Py2Metacn)]2+ (M=Ru, Fe) complexes is due to the difference in the redox stability of the key MV(O) intermediate. These results contribute to a better understanding of the WO mechanism and the differences between iron and ruthenium complexes in WO reactions.