4.7 Article

Influences of TiO2 phase structures on the structures and photocatalytic hydrogen production of CuOx/TiO2 photocatalysts

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 389, 期 -, 页码 760-767

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.07.173

关键词

Heterojunction; Surface phase junction; Cu2O; Charge separation; Charge-participated surface reaction

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB933104]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21525313, U1332113]
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences [KJZD-EW-M03]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [BH2060000036]
  5. MOE Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [WK2060030017, WK2060030022]
  6. Collaborative Innovation Center of Suzhou Nano Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

CuOx/TiO2 photocatalysts employing TiO2 with different phase structures as well as P25 as supports were prepared, and their structures and activity for photocatalytic H-2 production in methanol/water solution under simulated solar light were comparatively studied. Structural characterization results demonstrated that the TiO2 phase structure strongly affects the CuOx-TiO2 interaction and copper species in various CuOx/TiO2 photocatalysts. The Cu2O-rutile TiO2 interaction is much stronger than the Cu2O-anatase TiO2 interaction, facilitates the interfacial charge transfer process within the Cu2O-rutile TiO2 heterojunction but disables supported Cu2O to catalyze the hole-participated methanol oxidation. The Cu2O-anatase TiO2 heterojunction with the appropriate Cu2O-anatase TiO2 interaction and thus the balancing efficiencies between the interfacial charge transfer process and hole-participated methanol oxidation is most photocatalytic active, and CuOx/P25 with the largest population of Cu2O-anatase TiO2 heterojunction exhibits the highest photocatalytic H-2 production. These results provide novel insights in the applied surface science of CuOx/TiO2 photocatalysts. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据