“…There are currently several methods to recover energy from cellulose, rstly, by generating heat through burning, but this method is not only ine cient but also prone to serious carbon emission problems, and secondly, by converting cellulose into chemical products such as methanol and ethanol for utilization by biochemical or thermochemical methods, but the complex cross-linked structure of cellulose makes for more side reactions and low product yields (Saratale, Cho et al 2022, Wang, Lemaire et al 2022); among the thermochemical conversion Among the technologies, pyrolysis has attracted great interest as it offers a higher e ciency than burning, thus becoming an important means of degrading cellulose to produce combustible or chemically transformable small molecules (Ratchahat, Srifa et al 2021), but the presence of hydrogen bonds (Delarami, Ebrahimi et al 2015) between cellulose molecules and the high chemical stability of glycosidic bonds result in the high temperature (350°C) usually required for the pyrolysis of cellulose (Huang 2008), which is the main bottleneck in the pyrolytic utilisation of cellulose; therefore, the development of a method that enables low-temperature catalytic cracking of cellulose could result in signi cant energy savings in the energy utilisation of cellulose. In order to achieve e cient utilisation of cellulose, many researchers have introduced catalysts in the cracking process, mainly metal compounds (Dai, Zeng et al 2020, Liu, Jiang et al 2023, Xia, Yang et al 2023, acids (Changzhi, Qian et al 2008, Guo, Heeres et al 2020) and molecular sieves (Bekhouche, Trache et al 2023), etc. Although the introduction of these catalysts optimises the composition and quality of cellulose thermal cracking products to a certain extent and partially reduces the cracking temperature, the solid catalysts do not have su cient contact with the biomass, the reaction process is not heated uniformly and there are more catalytic side reactions.…”