Enhanced plasmonic fields are a promising way to increase the efficiency of photocatalytic water splitting. The availability of atomically thin materials opens up completely new opportunities. We report photocatalytic water splitting on ultrathin CdSe nanoplatelets placed in plasmonic nanogaps formed by a flat gold surface and a gold nanoparticle. The extreme field intensity created in these gaps increases the electron–hole pair production in the CdSe nanoplatelets and enhances the plasmon-mediated interfacial electron transfer. Compared to individual nanoparticles commonly used to enhance photocatalytic processes, gap-plasmons produce several orders of magnitude higher field enhancement, strongly localized inside the semiconductor sheet thus utilizing the entire photocatalyst efficiently.
Enhanced plasmonic fields are a promising way to increase the efficiency of photocatalytic water splitting. The availability of atomically thin materials opens up completely new opportunities. We report photocatalytic water splitting on ultrathin CdSe nanoplatelets placed in plasmonic nanogaps formed by a flat gold surface and a gold nanoparticle. The extreme field intensity created in these gaps increases the electron–hole pair production in the CdSe nanoplatelets and enhances the plasmon-mediated interfacial electron transfer. Compared to individual nanoparticles commonly used to enhance photocatalytic processes, gap-plasmons produce several orders of magnitude higher field enhancement, strongly localized inside the semiconductor sheet thus utilizing the entire photocatalyst efficiently.
Hydrogen
is a highly promising
energy carrier due to its entirely neutral combustion process, with
water as the only exhaust product. The major drawback for large-scale
employment of hydrogen-fueled devices is a lack of efficient production.
Various semiconductors have proven to enable photocatalytic water
splitting into hydrogen and oxygen.[1−3] Although existing technologies
are generally complicated and of low efficiency, it has been demonstrated
that the strongly enhanced electric field created by plasmonic nanostructures
can lead to increased electron–hole pair (e–h-pair)
production in nearby semiconductor crystals, which facilitates hydrogen
production using solar energy.[4−11] The availability of metallic nanoparticles of widely different shapes
and sizes allows specific matching of the plasmonic resonance conditions
to the semiconductor absorption bands and, therefore, optimizing the
e–h-pair production.[12,13]One bottleneck
commonly identified for photocatalytic water splitting
is the limited charge carrier diffusion length in the semiconductor,
typically below 20 nm.[14] E–h-pairs
created deeper in the bulk material cannot reach the surface and consequently
do not contribute to the water splitting. Thin layers of semiconductor
are therefore favorable to increase the yield for hydrogen production,
but the efficiency in such thin slabs is usually limited by the low
optical absorption cross-section.Due to the strong localization
of the optical field near plasmonic
nanoparticles, the light intensity is channelled to the surface layers
of the photocatalyst. However, compared to plasmons occurring in the
vicinity of individual nanoparticles, up to 100-fold higher electric
field enhancements are sustained in gaps of only few nanometers between
two nanoparticles or a nanoparticle spaced above a flat metallic surface.[15,16] Gap plasmons in the nanoparticle-on-mirror (NPoM) geometry exhibit
extremely localized electrical fields across the material inside the
nanogap (Figure 1a). Although the plasmonic
enhancement of individual nanoparticles for solar water splitting
has been widely studied,[17−19] no previous reports have focused
on the enhanced photocatalysis generated in plasmonic nanogaps by
using the much higher field intensities available.
Figure 1
(a) AuNPs on gold film with atomically thin CdSe sandwiched
between
them. Charge oscillations in AuNPs induce image charges in the metallic
surface and enable plasmonic coupling. (b) TEM of nanoplatelets. (c)
AFM of nanoplatelet monolayer on Au surface (phase image). (d) Dark
Field scattering of sample surface with AuNPs spaced from the surface
by nanoplatelet layer.
The emergence
of materials with single unit cell thickness such
as graphene, MoS2, or boron nitride are becoming ideal
candidates for placement in such plasmonic nanogaps because the nanometer-spacing
provided enables plasmonic coupling across the active material. This
construct enables a variety of interesting phenomena such as their
ultrasensitive interrogation via surface-enhanced Raman scattering.[20]In this paper, plasmon-enhanced photocatalytic
water splitting
from cadmium selenide (CdSe) nanoplatelets with a thickness of only
5 atomic layers or 1.7 nm[21] is demonstrated
(Figure 1b,c). The nanoplatelets are sandwiched
between a flat gold surface and gold nanoparticles (AuNP). Illumination
with broadband light excites strongly localized gap plasmons across
the platelets. The occurrence of strongly coupled gap plasmons between
AuNP and Au surface can be verified by a color change of the dark-field
scattering from green (indicating the plasmon resonance of uncoupled
AuNPs) to red (coupled AuNPs), as shown in Figure 1d. The exact spectral response is highly sensitive to the
specific morphology of each NPoM construct. With this configuration,
the coupled plasmons completely penetrate the photocatalytic material
as opposed to previous routes, in which only the surface layers benefit
from increased e–h-pair generation. Further, the usual problem
of charge recombination inside the catalyst is highly suppressed,
as the carrier diffusion length greatly exceeds the thickness of the
semiconductor.(a) AuNPs on gold film with atomically thin CdSe sandwiched
between
them. Charge oscillations in AuNPs induce image charges in the metallic
surface and enable plasmonic coupling. (b) TEM of nanoplatelets. (c)
AFM of nanoplatelet monolayer on Au surface (phase image). (d) Dark
Field scattering of sample surface with AuNPs spaced from the surface
by nanoplatelet layer.Gold surfaces were coated with a single layer of CdSe platelets
before adding 100 nm AuNP (see Methods). The
surface coverage of CdSe is ∼70% as verified with AFM (Figure 1c). For the photochemical water splitting experiments,
the sample was studied both in the dark and under illumination of
200 mW cm–2 from a xenon light source.A conventional
three electrode configuration was used with the
CdSe platelets in the NPoM geometry as the photoanode (working electrode),
Pt wire (counter electrode), and Ag/AgCl as a reference electrode.
Linear voltammetry sweeps (recorded at a scan rate of 10 mV/s) on
the CdSe platelets in the NPoM geometry show a photocurrent increase
with applied positive potential under illumination, whereas the currents
are negligible in the dark. For comparison, experiments were carried
out on AuNPs on a gold substrate in the absence of CdSe nanoplatelets,
where negligible photocurrent is observed. The photocurrent measured
on the CdSe platelets in the NPoM configuration was observed to be
enhanced by approximately five times as compared with the CdSe platelets
on the Au substrate without AuNPs on top (Figure 2a). This is a result from increased water oxidation within
the plasmonic hotspots between AuNP and Au surface. Control experiments
were conducted with the CdSe nanoplatelets placed on a fluorine-doped
tin oxide (FTO) surface instead of the gold. FTO does not sustain
plasmonic enhancements near the CdSe absorption bands. In this case
the absence of gap plasmons does not generate a noticeable photocurrent
enhancement as compared to the case without AuNPs (Figure 2b). Boundary-element (BEM) simulations show that
the field intensity generated from individual (uncoupled) nanoparticles
is more than 3 orders of magnitude weaker than the gap plasmons at
the platelet absorption edge (Figure 3a) and
not sufficient to generate a noticeable photocurrent increase. Given
the sparse NP surface coverage in these experiments, it is emphasized
that the enhanced fields cover only a small fraction of the sample
surface. Taking into account an AuNP density of ∼5 × 105 particles/mm2 and using the hot spot width of
∼20 nm obtained from the BEM simulations (Figure 3b), we estimate that the photocurrent locally generated inside
the nanogaps is enhanced by roughly ×104 over the
bare platelet coated gold surface in the absence of AuNPs (calculation
see Supporting Information). This indicates
a figure for the theoretically possible enhancement in a plasmonic
field, but is not easily scalable as the hot spots are confined to
minuscule regions on a plasmonic device.
Figure 2
(a) Photocurrent from
the CdSe platelets on gold surface in NPoM
geometry (green), without AuNPs (orange), and without illumination
(black). (b) Photocurrent from CdSe platelets on FTO surface, with
(green) and without (orange) AuNPs. (c) Extinction and luminescence
spectra of colloidal CdSe platelets and simulated NPoM extinction.
The NPoM setup exhibits three plasmonic resonances (j1, j2, j3), whereas j3 overlaps with the
electron/heavy-hole transition.
Figure 3
(a) BEM simulation of intensity enhancement |E|2/|E0|2 in the
nanogap and in the vicinity of a single nanoparticle. Dashed line
marks the platelet optical bandgap transition. (b) Field enhancement
at the optical bandgap of the CdSe platelets (λ = 548 nm) in
the NPoM-nanogap (top) and for an isolated AuNP (bottom) for comparison.
(a) Photocurrent from
the CdSe platelets on gold surface in NPoM
geometry (green), without AuNPs (orange), and without illumination
(black). (b) Photocurrent from CdSe platelets on FTO surface, with
(green) and without (orange) AuNPs. (c) Extinction and luminescence
spectra of colloidal CdSe platelets and simulated NPoM extinction.
The NPoM setup exhibits three plasmonic resonances (j1, j2, j3), whereas j3 overlaps with the
electron/heavy-hole transition.The origin of the strong plasmonic enhancement in the nanogap
is
explored with boundary element (BEM) simulations. Plasmonic coupling
between nanoparticle and surface leads to three predominant modes
as a result of particle–surface coupling, denoted as j1, j2, and j3 (Figure 2c). These
three modes are the fundamental solution (j1) and higher orders of a nanoscale metal–insulator–metal
waveguide formed by the nanoparticle and the surface.[22] Although the fundamental mode (j1) is located further in the infrared, j2 and j3 are close to the CdSe absorption
bands. Mode j3 overlaps with the electron/heavy-hole
transition of the nanoplatelets at 550 nm and, hence, provides the
major contribution to the amplified creation of e–h-pairs.
The field enhancements produced in this nanometer-sized gap are strongly
wavelength dependent. At the CdSe absorption edge, the field is enhanced
by |E|2 ∼104 and is
about 3 orders of magnitude higher than around an isolated nanoparticle
(Figure 3).The noticeable photocurrent
increase in the NPoM configuration
but negligible enhancement on the FTO surface suggests that the enhanced
water splitting is mainly a result of the strongly localized gap plasmons
across the CdSe sheets in the plasmonic nanogap rather than a single
particle plasmon. Further, plasmon-mediated electron transfer from
AuNPs, which has been extensively studied in recent years,[14,17] can contribute to the observed photocurrent enhancement because
interfacial electron transfer from AuNP to the conduction band of
CdSe is facilitated through the gap plasmon. The low photocurrent
observed from AuNP-modified CdSe platelets on the FTO substrate indicates
that the enhancement in Figure 2a is not caused
by photocatalytic effects or any water oxidation catalytic effects
of the AuNPs. It also suggests that catalytic properties of the Au
substrate have no effect because the photocurrent is low in the case
of CdSe-platelet-coated Au surfaces without AuNPs (Figure 2a).(a) BEM simulation of intensity enhancement |E|2/|E0|2 in the
nanogap and in the vicinity of a single nanoparticle. Dashed line
marks the platelet optical bandgap transition. (b) Field enhancement
at the optical bandgap of the CdSe platelets (λ = 548 nm) in
the NPoM-nanogap (top) and for an isolated AuNP (bottom) for comparison.To qualitatively understand the
charge generation and recombination
behavior in such thin catalytic films, the transient photocurrent
decay was investigated (Figure 4). Here, the
potential was kept constant at 0.5 V and chopped illumination was
applied while recording the photocurrent as a function of time. When
the light is switched on, a photocurrent spike occurs due to the sudden
generation of charge carriers, which quickly recombine as seen from
the rapid photocurrent decay (Figure 4a). The
time scale of this transient decay can be determined by a logarithmic
plot of parameter D, given by[23]where Im is the
spike photocurrent, Is is the steady state
photocurrent, and I(t)is the photocurrent
at time t (Figure 4b). The
transient decay time is defined as the time at which ln D = −1.
Figure 4
(a) Photocurrent transients at fixed potential of 0.5
V vs Ag/AgCl
for chopped illumination with and without nanoparticles. (b) Transient
decay time with NPs. Inset shows photocurrent spike after switching
on the light (magnified from (a)). (c) Action spectra of the CdSe
platelets on gold surface in NPoM (green) and without NPoM geometry
(orange). The dotted curve shows the enhancement factor of the action
spectrum for CdSe platelets sandwiched in NPoM. (d) Stability test
of CdSe platelets in NPoM at 0.5 V vs Ag/AgCl.
(a) Photocurrent transients at fixed potential of 0.5
V vs Ag/AgCl
for chopped illumination with and without nanoparticles. (b) Transient
decay time with NPs. Inset shows photocurrent spike after switching
on the light (magnified from (a)). (c) Action spectra of the CdSe
platelets on gold surface in NPoM (green) and without NPoM geometry
(orange). The dotted curve shows the enhancement factor of the action
spectrum for CdSe platelets sandwiched in NPoM. (d) Stability test
of CdSe platelets in NPoM at 0.5 V vs Ag/AgCl.The transient decay time (Figure 4b) is
<100 ms for both samples with and without NPs. This photocurrent
decay rate is determined by the degree to which the charge generation
process is dominated by recombination. The steady-state current (Is) is achieved when the recombination and charge
generation reach equilibrium.[24,25] In bulk semiconductors,
the charge recombination rate is reduced in the presence of plasmonic
fields[26,27] as the field (and hence e–h-pair
production) is channelled to the semiconductor surface whereas the
charge recombination takes place in the bulk material. In these experiments,
the plasmonic fields do not significantly affect the transient time
as in the case of these ultrathin semiconductor slabs the plasmon
completely interpenetrates the material and the carrier diffusion
length exceeds the thickness of the active media. Hence, in both cases—with
and without nanoparticles—the charge carrier generation is
homogeneous within the cross section of the CdSe slab and an increased
carrier lifetime in the presence of nanoparticles is not observed.
It is notable that the access of H2O into and O2 out of the plasmonic hot spot is thus not restricted by this nanogeometry,
likely because the molecules are well coupled into the bulk solution.Action spectra of the CdSe platelets in Au NPoM (green) and outside
this NPoM geometry were also taken to investigate the spectral response
of the photocurrent enhancement in the plasmonic nanogap (Figure 4c). The CdSe shows a higher photocurrent response
than the CdSe outside this NPoM configuration over the entire investigated
spectral range from 440 to 580 nm. The enhancement depends on the
wavelength and peaks at ×4–5 between 500 and 580 nm, but
drops to ×2–3 at shorter wavelengths where the plasmonic
field enhancement decays. At wavelengths >600 nm, the photocurrent
vanishes as the photon energy is lower than required to produce excitons
in the 550 nm CdSe bandgap. These maximum enhancements peak at the
heavy- and light-hole excitons, showing a key role in the NPoM is
the ionization of the bound carrriers which can then be extracted.Further, the stability of the NPoM configuration for solar water
splitting was measured in a typical configuration (Figure 4d). The photocurrent decreases by less than 20%
over the course of a 1 h experiment. This slow decrease is attributed
to the well-documented photocorrosion of the CdSe in solution.[28]In conclusion, for the first time, enhanced
water-splitting activity
on CdSe nanoplatelets placed in plasmonic nanogaps is demonstrated.
A 5-fold increase in the photocurrent was measured across a device
sparsely covered with AuNPs. The local photocatalytic activity in
the plasmonic gaps is estimated to be locally increased by almost
4 orders of magnitude. The use of nanometer-thin semiconductors enables
plasmonic coupling throughout the material resulting in dramatically
higher electromagnetic field enhancements compared to single nanoparticles.
The photocorrosion of CdSe under optical is a problem, limiting its
long-term durability. This scheme, however, is not limited to CdSe
but can easily be extended to thin films of other photocatalytic materials
such as α-Fe2O3, Cu2O, and
many others. Further improvement is expected for a closer matching
of the catalyst’s absorption bands and the plasmon resonance.
Nanometer-thick semiconductors overcome the complications incurred
from the limited charge-carrier diffusion lengths because all excitons
are produced near the surface. Employing ultrathin semiconductor layers
reduces the usage of expensive and often toxic materials and can potentially
lead to the design of flexible devices, opening entirely new possibilities
for solar energy production. Because photons incident on regions outside
the plasmonic hotspots are not absorbed, simple corrugation and crumpling
of these flexible sheets on plastic substrates can lead to very high
total efficiencies.
Experimental Methods
Sample Preparation. Silicon surfaces were electron-beam
evaporated with 70 nm of gold on top of a 5 nm thick chromium adhesion
layer. The surfaces were then immersed in 10 mM 4-aminothiophenol
(ATP) ethanolic solution for 24 h to ensure monolayer coverage and
then rinsed. The samples were dipped in colloidal solutions of nanoplatelets
in hexane for another 24 h, resulting in a monolayer of platelets
on the surface with a coverage of (∼70%) as revealed by AFM
(Figure 1e). Colloidal AuNPs (100 nm, BBI)
were then drop-cast on the surface. Nonbound particles were washed
away after ∼5 min, resulting in a sparse NP surface-coverage
with a density of ∼5 × 105 particles mm–2.
CdSe Platelets.
Colloidal CdSe
nanoplatelets used
in these experiments are oleic-acid-capped and have a thickness of
5 atomic layers, or 1.67 nm.[29] The lateral
dimensions are typically 10 nm × 25 nm as revealed by TEM and
AFM (Figure 1d,e). The platelet absorption
edge is at 550 nm as measured by UV–vis spectra (Figure 2c).
Photocurrent Measurements.
A
xenon light source
(Bentham IL 75E) was used with optical power of 200 mW cm–2. All potentials are reported against the reversible hydrogen electrode
(RHE). The electrolyte was aqueous phosphate buffer at pH 7 without
any additive. The voltammetry sweep was performed immediately after
the sample was immersed into the electrolyte.
Simulations.
Simulations were carried out using
the boundary-element method.[30,31] CdSe platelets were
modeled as a layer with refractive index taken from the literature
(n = 2.55) and with a 1 nm layer of oleic acid refractive
index (n = 1.46) above and underneath to account
for the ligands. The layer was sandwiched between a AuNP and a flat
Au surface with dielectric function taken from Johnson and Christy.
Authors: Vivek V Thacker; Lars O Herrmann; Daniel O Sigle; Tao Zhang; Tim Liedl; Jeremy J Baumberg; Ulrich F Keyser Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-03-13 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Wei Zhang; Michael Saliba; Samuel D Stranks; Yao Sun; Xian Shi; Ulrich Wiesner; Henry J Snaith Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2013-08-19 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Hung Ji Huang; Yen Han Wang; Yuan-Fong Chou Chau; Hai-Pang Chiang; Jeffrey Chi-Sheng Wu Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 4.703