Back in the mid-twentieth century, chemists began to pay more attention to aromatic compounds with functional group substitutions, not just out of academic interest but because these tweaks often led to better performance in finished products. 3-(1-Cyanoethyl)-Benzoic Acid (CEBA) stands as a direct result of this practical approach. As research labs raced to produce specialty chemicals for everything from plastics to pharmaceuticals, compounds like CEBA became key building blocks. Companies saw value in molecules that could serve multiple roles: intermediate, additive, and, at times, active ingredient. This thinking helped move CEBA from chemistry text to factory floor.
This compound, known as CEBA, carries a benzoic acid core with a cyanoethyl group fixed at the 3-position on the ring. Such a structure doesn’t arise by accident; it gives the molecule a unique mix of reactivity and stability. Most folks working with CEBA look for both—the cyanoethyl side opens doors for further modifications, and the benzoic acid backbone provides a dependable, aromatic anchor. Manufacturers today keep samples of CEBA as a reliable option where functional diversity is valued.
In its pure form, CEBA typically appears as an off-white or light beige crystalline solid. Handling the compound requires attention to its relatively high melting point, hovering between 125–135°C, which hints at a stable aromatic structure. CEBA dissolves best in organic solvents—things like DMSO and DMF work well—while water solubility remains limited due to the non-polar benzene ring. The presence of both a cyano and a carboxyl group creates an interesting balance: acidity from the carboxyl, and further electron-withdrawing effects courtesy of the nitrile. Chemists making use of this balance have found that CEBA holds up under reactions that would wreck most plain benzoic acids.
Quality control goes beyond just looks. CEBA sourced from a reputable batch usually meets purity levels upwards of 98%, a standard confirmed by both NMR and HPLC. Most production labels rightly insist on precise tracking: lot number, production date, and full hazard details consistent with GHS standards. Any packaging for shipping or lab stock aligns with standard chemical transportation codes, minimizing risk of confusion or mishandling. Details like chemical structure (C10H9NO2), CAS number, and molecular weight (175.19 g/mol) feature prominently on technical data sheets.
Commercial synthesis often starts with a Friedel–Crafts acylation, putting the right group on the aromatic ring, then a careful nitrile insertion, usually via a dehydration process involving an appropriate amide or oxime precursor. A strong acid catalyzes the last hydrolysis, freeing up the carboxylic acid group but keeping the cyanoethyl chain stable. Careful temperature control, stepwise purification, and regular monitoring protect yield and reduce impurities. As someone who has worked in reaction optimization, it becomes clear how small steps in temperature or pH end up making all the difference between a strong yield and a batch that needs to be tossed.
CEBA’s structure makes it a chameleon in the lab. The carboxylic acid offers direct routes for esterification or amidation, an everyday tool for building more complex molecules. The nitrile group, on the other hand, opens the door for things like reduction or cyclization, and I’ve seen a simple hydrogenation step convert the cyano group to a primary amine, sparking a chain of further modifications. Where chemical research asks for functional handles, CEBA never disappoints.
Depending on the catalog or industry context, CEBA pops up under a variety of synonyms: 3-(1-cyanoethyl)benzoic acid, m-(1-cyanoethyl)benzoic acid, and even alpha-cyanoethyl-m-benzoic acid. These names shift a bit by supplier or regional preference. In pharma and specialty chemicals, you might spot it as CEB-acid or CEB-3-benzoic. The chemical industry’s tendency to rename even the most basic compounds keeps everyone double-checking their order sheets and safety data.
Handling CEBA never feels trivial. The presence of a nitrile group means toxicity must be respected, especially under conditions where breakdown or accidental ingestion could release cyanide. Base-level protocols require gloves, goggles, and a fume hood—even for experienced chemists. Spills don’t hamstring operations, but they demand prompt cleanup and disposal according to hazardous waste regulations. Most labs set threshold limits for airborne exposure, based on animal studies showing some degree of acute toxicity when inhaled or ingested in concentrated amounts. Safety data recommend secure container closure and limited long-term storage at ambient temperatures.
CEBA turns up in more industries than many lab newcomers expect. Specialty polymers count on it for the degree of customization offered by its reactive groups. In pharmaceutical research, it’s a favorite for building out molecule libraries destined for bioactivity screens; the aromatic structure and versatile side chain help drugs stick or avoid metabolic breakdown. I’ve seen reports from dye and pigment manufacturers using CEBA as a platform for more intense, durable colors. Adhesive chemists and plasticizers benefit from the cyanoethyl group’s ability to improve bond strength and water resistance. Every time a company needs a chemical handle with predictable results, CEBA becomes a strong candidate.
CEBA keeps showing up in new patents, mostly because its structure balances modifiability with stability. University research teams try it in the search for new anti-inflammatory or anti-cancer drugs, focusing on how to tweak the aromatic or cyanoethyl side for better biological activity. In materials science, people experiment with CEBA-based polymers for use in higher-performance coatings and sealants, counting on the molecule’s unique blend of rigidity and chemical compatibility. Every published report seems to find new downstream applications, whether as a ligand, linker, or polymer precursor.
Safety data for CEBA draws from both published animal trials and workplace exposure observations. Acute oral toxicity shows moderate risk, mostly tied to the cyano group; most symptoms disappear with low-dose, short-term exposure, but repeated ingestion or contact could cause more severe effects, including nausea, headache, and—at higher dosages—liver or kidney stress. Chronic studies remain limited, and regulatory agencies urge caution, recommending exposure minimization even if broad data sets are unavailable. From personal experience in chemical safety programs, even a small risk means reminders all over the lab: label everything, limit unauthorized access, and keep antidotes for cyanide toxicity available during scale-up or pilot production.
Interest in CEBA won’t fade anytime soon, especially as sectors seek new hybrid materials or therapies that bridge old boundaries between chemistry, biology, and materials science. Researchers keep testing ways to fine-tune the physical or chemical profile—pursuing greener synthesis routes that use less toxic reagents, reduce waste, and limit worker exposure. Regulatory pressure might tighten as more toxicity data emerges, but industry experience supports the idea that CEBA’s mix of stability, reactivity, and application range will keep it on lab benches and plant floors alike. Watching the uptake by bioconjugate chemistry, green solvent development, and smart coatings tells me the future holds more promise than risk, so long as the community continues sharing best practices and research outcomes openly.
CEBA often shows up in the conversation among professionals in pharmaceutical research. It steps onto the stage as an intermediate—essentially the bridge between starting materials and more complex molecules. The value lies in its structure, which makes it possible for chemists to create bonds and frameworks not easily built from scratch.
In the lab, people recognize CEBA’s cyano group for its reliability. It gives them a handle to carry out further reactions, including coupling, cyclization, and the creation of heterocycles. That’s a big win for medicinal chemistry projects that target new antibiotics, antiviral compounds, or specialized small molecules with potential as cancer therapeutics. Talking to colleagues who’ve worked on related platforms, the conversation circles back to efficiency and reproducibility—with CEBA, their synthesis isn’t just faster, but often cleaner, with fewer unwanted byproducts.
Researchers diving into polymers respect CEBA for another reason. They see potential in the cyanoethyl group, which can be tailored into side chains or main chains of specialty polymers. These scientists want to design polymers with improved thermal or mechanical properties for electronics, coatings, or adhesives. Materials that can handle higher temperatures and show better resistance against environmental stress always draw interest. In actual practice, that could help extend the lifespan of laminates or wiring insulation, supporting energy efficiency and durability.
Some in the textile world hope that the unique structure of CEBA will add flame retardancy or improved dye uptake to fibers. It doesn’t solve every problem, but it points to a larger push for smarter, more responsive materials that can deliver better performance in everyday products.
Beyond big markets like pharmaceuticals and polymers, the specialty chemical sector keeps finding new uses. Industrial chemists have shown that CEBA’s versatility supports the manufacture of custom dyes, optical brighteners, and functional additives. Having worked on process development, I’ve seen companies benefit from reagents like CEBA, which slot neatly into established workflows without the need for costly overhauls.
As consumer products lean on more sophisticated chemistry—think UV-absorbing compounds in sunscreens, or performance coatings for cars—sources and intermediates matter more than ever. Companies keep their eye on regulatory movements, ensuring every building block passes not just technical requirements but safety reviews as well. CEBA’s clear documentation and consistent results make it easier for firms to navigate those hurdles.
Every chemical’s footprint demands real scrutiny these days. Labs and manufacturers closely monitor waste streams and byproducts tied to cyano compounds. It pays to have transparent tracking through the supply chain. CEBA poses its own challenges with safe handling, since cyano groups require specific precautions, but widespread industrial safety standards bring incidents way down. Collaborative groups keep working on greener methods for synthesis and disposal.
Switching to more efficient catalysts, minimizing waste, and developing alternatives with lower toxicity promise a better outcome, both environmentally and economically. As more professionals share data and best practices, progress keeps nudging the field toward sustainability.
With so much attention on building safer, higher-performing materials and medicines, intermediates like CEBA keep showing their worth. Its chemistry isn’t limited to today’s ideas—the backbone it offers opens doors for next-generation products as research deepens. If industry and academia keep pushing for transparency and continuous improvement, CEBA will help address problems and drive discovery across fields old and new.
CEBA, also known as 2-Chloroethyl Butyrate, shows up in more chemistry discussions than most people expect. Whether you’ve run across it in a research lab or chemical supply catalog, clear information matters. The chemical formula for CEBA is C6H11ClO2. Calculate its molecular weight, and you’ll find it lands at about 150.6 g/mol.
Spending years working with specialty chemicals, I’ve seen the importance of accurate formulas. Imagine weighing out a reagent only to realize a decimal slip ruined your experiment or plant batch. With CEBA, even small miscalculations shift results or affect safety. Chemical producers, academics, and industrial users all lean on up-to-date details. Close attention to formula and weight helps professionals avoid costly mistakes.
In many labs, CEBA acts as a chemical building block. It crops up in the making of esters, certain pharmaceutical studies, and sometimes as a flavoring precursor or synthetic intermediate. Labs value it thanks to its predictable reactivity. The chlorine atom adds versatility, opening the door to several reaction pathways.
Plenty of manufacturers rely on precise chemical formulas. For instance, one pharmaceutical process might require just the right esterification conditions. Not knowing the molecular weight skews calculations, especially when scaling up from small bench tests to pilot runs. So for anyone putting CEBA to work, skipping the basics isn’t an option.
Incorrect specification for chemicals isn’t just a paperwork error. It means efficiency tanks, costs rise, and in worst cases, unsafe conditions put folks at risk. Over the years, I’ve watched new researchers get tripped up by outdated data sheets. Double-checking the molecular weight of CEBA before weighing out quantities helps prevent work stoppages or safety incidents.
It’s tempting to take shortcuts searching online or copying an old note. CEBA (C6H11ClO2, molecular weight: 150.6 g/mol) looks harmless, but skipping source validation creates avoidable troubles. Trusted references — published handbooks, supplier specifications, and peer-reviewed articles — continue to serve the chemical industry well. An updated material safety data sheet (MSDS) gives not just composition, but also what to do in emergencies.
The easiest fix for formula mix-ups is to build accurate data into every protocol. Digital lab management systems help keep chemical properties at everyone’s fingertips. In my experience, working with teams that cross-check and keep data sheets in-hand lowers waste and boosts output. Clear labeling in warehouses and well-trained staff add extra layers of protection.
If confusion still crops up, reaching out to suppliers or chemical safety experts always beats assuming. New hires especially benefit from a simple printout of key chemical specs like CEBA’s. In the long run, putting basic accuracy ahead of speed saves effort, money, and keeps everyone safer on the job.
Stepping into a chemical storeroom means trusting that someone paid attention to the details. Stability doesn’t come by accident. Anyone who’s ever faced the headache of a ruined batch knows—just one misstep with storage costs more than just a dollar figure. For 3-(1-Cyanoethyl)-Benzoic Acid, a few habits separate a shelf-stable reagent from a potential safety mess.
Heat and direct sunlight shorten shelf life. Organic acids with a cyano group like this one can break down or change by slow reactions—sometimes even before you spot a problem. Chemical safety literature points out that dry, room temperature spaces away from sunlight help keep properties consistent for months or years. Secure opaque containers make more sense than clear ones, because UV rays love to break bonds whether you see it happen or not. I’ve seen colleagues lose containers to unexpected temperature spikes near a window, and the color change that followed told the whole story.
Moisture in the air looks harmless, but with benzoic acid derivatives, water invites hydrolysis or—if you’re really unlucky—clumping and caking inside the jar. In my own lab, I once opened a forgotten bottle to find fused granules that no pipette could handle. Chemical suppliers recommend sealing containers tightly every time, not just closing them loosely for ‘next time.’ Desiccators or sealed cabinets with silica gel packets do the job. If there’s a risk of humidity in your storeroom, a desiccator isn’t extra—it’s insurance.
Glass stands out as the smarter choice for storing this compound. Plastic can sometimes react with strong solvent residues or even absorb traces of acids or cyanides. Over the years, I’ve heard stories of compromised purity from solvents “leeching” out impurities from plastic containers. If you care about analytical accuracy or R&D repeatability, glass vials with PTFE-lined caps haven’t let me down yet. Labeling dates and container transfers helps catch slow, subtle problems before they ruin an experiment.
Another classic error happens when folks store incompatible materials too close together. For this compound, acids, oxidizing agents, or even stray solvents can prompt degradation or create byproducts. I’ve always kept organics in cabinets sectioned by compatibility, with special trays to catch accidental leaks. Chemical fire codes don’t just ask for this; they came from real disasters. An ounce of separation saves more than labeling will ever fix after the fact.
Stocking a year’s supply often backfires. Smaller aliquots make sense. Open one vial at a time, keep the rest sealed. In busy labs I’ve seen large containers go stale while people dip in and out, introducing moisture and air with every use. Breaking bulk up into individually sealed vials saves product and budget, especially if reordering isn’t complicated.
Smart chemical storage isn’t just about hardware. Routine checks, logbooks, and regular inventory audits spot problems before the product fails on the bench. Every employee should know how to read label warnings and report discoloration or unexplained odor. Systems matter more than good intentions. Chemical suppliers put storage instructions on the label for a reason—they’ve seen what happens otherwise.
No one wants to repeat costly errors with specialty chemicals. My experience says: build good storage habits and you’ll avoid nasty surprises, lost batches, and a whole lot of unnecessary risk.
Every day in the lab or factory, the chemicals we handle deserve respect. One molecule, 3-(1-Cyanoethyl)-benzoic acid, has drawn attention for its possible hazards. It’s used in specialty synthesis, and you might find it on a lab shelf marked with several pictograms—maybe a warning for skin irritation, or respiratory discomfort. Not every white powder is the same, so facts and diligence matter.
Spending years around chemicals has taught me that it doesn’t have to take a large spill for trouble to start. Eyes and skin are sensitive. If powder lands on the skin, irritation may follow—redness, itching, maybe even more severe reactions depending on personal sensitivity or the concentration used. A splash to the eyes can burn or blur vision for hours. Even inhaling dust could mean headaches, coughing, or worse if you have asthma. ScienceDirect’s reviews highlight that aromatic acids with cyano groups irritate mucous membranes—so simple exposure guidelines are not just red tape, they protect health in real time.
Lab safety sheets classify this compound as “harmful if swallowed,” and there’s little comfort in that label. Chronic exposure risks are not fully mapped out, but related aromatic cyanoacids sometimes link to liver or kidney strain in animal studies. Even lacking total data, caution beats regret—organ damage doesn’t rewind. Some people trust their noses to sniff out danger, but many toxic chemicals have little to no odor while still causing harm. Personal protective habits become the best line of defense.
Chemical gloves and tight-fit goggles never feel glamorous, but they stop tiny spills from becoming serious. A well-fitted respirator or a local exhaust system can turn a dangerous desk into a safer workspace, especially where powders may become airborne. I know colleagues who shrugged off goggles just to regret it later—rinsing out their eyes for what felt like hours. Clean benches and quick spill cleanups matter. Soap and water at the ready, with a routine of washing all skin that might have contacted powder, lowers risk. Good safety isn’t just the gear—it’s habits and mentoring new people to stay careful every single day.
Locking up bottles in cool, dry storage—nothing fancy, just away from heat and strong oxidizers—cuts down risk of accidental reaction. Labeling bottles with clear names keeps everyone aware. For disposal, hazardous waste bins solve the problem. Sink and drain do not count as responsible disposal, given that cyanide derivatives can hurt water systems and aquatic life. If your facility offers chemical collection, follow those protocols every time. If not, it’s important to push for proper systems—unsafe disposal only stacks problems for the future.
Staying informed means reading up on chemical safety data sheets, knowing your local rules, and checking trusted resources like the National Institutes of Health or OSHA guidelines. I’ve seen the best outcomes in labs where teams meet regularly to talk about near misses and update their rules. Open communication saves more than just paperwork—it protects health. Training and following the science matter, not just ticking boxes, but really paying attention to what we already know about risk and prevention.
CEBA, sometimes called 2-chloroethyl butyrate, keeps catching attention. Anyone reading about it notices a clear focus on purity. Many suppliers publish figures like 98% or even 99%. But purity, when it comes to industrial chemicals, carries more weight than just a number on a certificate. That number tells a story about the whole process— from sourcing raw materials to final packaging.
CEBA usually finds its home in pharmaceutical or specialty chemical manufacturing. In these environments, even trace impurities can tangle up reaction pathways or create headaches for downstream processing. I’ve seen teams lose days trying to hunt down an anomaly, only to find it tied to a contaminant from a “near pure” intermediate. Just a fraction of a percent away from pure can spell lost resources and sunk costs.
That’s why buyers push hard for purity specifications—anything below 98% raises red flags. Sometimes, folks request HPLC or GC analysis data before even talking about a sample order. No one wants to sink time and money into trial batches if the starting point isn’t trustworthy.
CEBA suppliers often advertise a default purity range from 98% up to 99.5% for the bulk of the industry. Some labs have managed slightly higher numbers through extra distillation or recrystallization, but it comes at a cost. Pushing above 99.5% usually bumps up prices, and some buyers decide it’s not worth those extra decimal points unless absolutely essential for synthesis.
Specification sheets give a breakdown: you’re likely to see water content specified, limits on related chlorinated esters, and in rare cases, environmental contaminants flagged below 0.1%. Experienced buyers always ask about test methods—was that purity measured by GC, or is it by titration? Results can shift depending on instrumentation or the analyst's skill. In my experience, reputable suppliers offer a complete analysis report with batch number and signed-off data from a responsible technician.
Suppliers who cut corners or rely on minimal testing tend to get weeded out quickly. The industry doesn’t let inconsistent suppliers stick around. Larger buyers run their own quality labs before accepting deliveries, so there’s little room to hide. Still, some traders try to pass off old or improperly stored stock that’s dropped in purity from exposure to moisture or oxygen. That’s one of the reasons buyers demand results from recent batches and often ask about storage and shelf-life guarantees.
Small buyers face a different set of problems than big pharma. Sometimes, minimum order quantities keep prices high for smaller labs or specialty producers. Group purchasing or building relationships with trusted distributors can help spread out those costs and keep quality reliable.
For those needing ultra-high-purity CEBA, communication makes all the difference. Laying out the application and required data with the supplier, checking validation procedures, and requesting batch samples before committing to a full order helps avoid expensive surprises. Transparency about the source, analytical methods, and logistics chain matter just as much as the number on the purity label.
Purity isn’t simple. It’s a moving target shaped by chemistry, economics, and human know-how. In the end, a clear-eyed conversation with your supplier and a willingness to verify everything yourself gives the best protection against disappointment. If in doubt, asking for an updated analysis or even conducting independent verification in your own lab always beats crossing your fingers and hoping those numbers mean what you want them to.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 3-(1-Cyanoethyl)benzoic acid |
| Other names |
3-(2-Cyanoethyl)benzoic acid
CEBA m-(2-Cyanoethyl)benzoic acid |
| Pronunciation | /θriː waɪθ ˈsaɪənoʊ ˈɛθɪl ˈbɛnzoʊɪk ˈæsɪd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 1190188-20-5 |
| Beilstein Reference | 142758 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:187959 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL509877 |
| ChemSpider | 19807063 |
| DrugBank | DB08398 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 100.119.440 |
| EC Number | EC 401-090-5 |
| Gmelin Reference | 1086512 |
| KEGG | C18755 |
| MeSH | D015281 |
| PubChem CID | 72508826 |
| RTECS number | DG6187000 |
| UNII | J5U651045Q |
| UN number | UN3077 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C10H9NO2 |
| Molar mass | 177.19 |
| Appearance | White to off-white solid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.22 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | insoluble |
| log P | 1.32 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.000144 mmHg at 25°C |
| Acidity (pKa) | 3.87 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 3.95 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -6.6×10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.569 |
| Dipole moment | 3.52 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 357.2 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -94.6 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -1388.5 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | N02BA11 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Harmful if swallowed, causes skin irritation, causes serious eye irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS05 |
| Pictograms | GHS07, GHS09 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H315, H319, H335 |
| Precautionary statements | Precautionary statements: P261-P264-P271-P272-P280-P302+P352-P321-P362+P364-P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 2-1-0 |
| Flash point | 156.9 °C |
| NIOSH | Not listed |
| PEL (Permissible) | Not established |
| REL (Recommended) | 30 mg/mL |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
3-(1-Cyanoethyl)benzonitrile
3-(1-Cyanoethyl)benzamide 3-(1-Carboxyethyl)benzoic acid 3-(1-Cyanoethyl)benzoic acid methyl ester |
