4.6 Article

Photocatalysis of aqueous PFOA by common catalysts of In2O3, Ga2O3, TiO2, CeO2 and CdS: influence factors and mechanistic insights

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOCHEMISTRY AND HEALTH
Volume 44, Issue 9, Pages 2943-2953

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10653-021-01127-2

Keywords

Band gap energy; Commercial catalysts; Initial pH; Photon energy; Perfluorooctanoic acid; Photogenerated electrons

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC) [201606890028]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the effectiveness of five commonly used photocatalysts in degrading perfluorooctanoic acid. Gallium oxide was found to be the most efficient catalyst, while cadmium sulfide had lower degradation effects. The initial pH, photon energy, and band gap were found to influence the catalytic reaction, but quantum yield may not be the determining factor.
Gallium oxide (Ga2O3), titanium dioxide (TiO2), cerium dioxide (CeO2), indium oxide (In2O3) and cadmium sulfide (CdS) were commonly used under UV light as photocatalysis system for the pollutants' degradation. In this study, these five catalysts were applied for the photodegradation of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a well-known perfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS). As a result, the PFOA photodegradation performance was sequenced as: Ga2O3 > TiO2 > CeO2 > In2O3 > CdS. To further explain the photocatalysis mechanism, the effects of initial pH, photon energy and band gap were evaluated. The initial pH of 3 +/- 0.2 hinders the catalytic reaction of CdS, resulting in low degradation of PFOA, while it has no significant effect on Ga2O3, TiO2, CeO2 and In2O3. In addition, quantum yield was sequenced as TiO2 > CeO2 > Ga2O3 > In2O3, which may not be the main factor determining the degradation effect. Notably, the band gap energy from large to narrow was as: Ga2O3 > TiO2 > CeO2 > In2O3 > CdS, which exactly matched their degradation performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available