In this research, we performed scanning electrochemical microscopy to screen M x (In0.2Cd0.8)1-x S (M = V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mo, Ru, Ag, W, Ir, Pt, and Te) photocatalyst arrays for efficient photoelectrochemical reaction. Doping 30% Ag to form the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode could result in the highest photocurrent, and also, the anode photocurrents were found to be 1 and 0.53 mA/cm2 under UV-visible and visible light, respectively, comparatively higher than that of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode (0.45 and 0.25 mA/cm2). The highest incident photo-to-current conversion efficiency of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst and In0.2Cd0.8S were found to be 64% (λ = 450 nm) and 57% (λ = 400 nm), respectively. The Mott-Schottky plots showed that In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrodes could exhibit a flat-band potential of -0.85 and -0.55 V versus Ag/AgCl, respectively. Based on these findings, the superior photocatalytic activity of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrode was mainly attributed to its high crystalline structure for efficient charge separation and reduction of charge recombination in the heterojunction of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S and Ag2S.
In this research, we performed scanning electrochemical microscopy to screen M x (In0.2Cd0.8)1-x S (M = V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mo, Ru, Ag, W, Ir, Pt, and Te) photocatalyst arrays for efficient photoelectrochemical reaction. Doping 30% Ag to form the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode could result in the highest photocurrent, and also, the anode photocurrents were found to be 1 and 0.53 mA/cm2 under UV-visible and visible light, respectively, comparatively higher than that of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode (0.45 and 0.25 mA/cm2). The highest incident photo-to-current conversion efficiency of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst and In0.2Cd0.8S were found to be 64% (λ = 450 nm) and 57% (λ = 400 nm), respectively. The Mott-Schottky plots showed that In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrodes could exhibit a flat-band potential of -0.85 and -0.55 V versus Ag/AgCl, respectively. Based on these findings, the superior photocatalytic activity of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrode was mainly attributed to its high crystalline structure for efficient charge separation and reduction of charge recombination in the heterojunction of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S and Ag2S.
As the global warming
issue is becoming important, the utilization of solar energy for photoelectrochemical
and photocatalytic splitting of water splitting into hydrogen and
oxygen has attracted much attention due to the hydrogen as an alternative
clean fuel.[1−3] In general, chalcogenide semiconductors could be
considered as a good photocatalyst because of the suitable energy
band corresponding to visible-light absorption. Among these chalcogenide
semiconductors, CdS with a band gap of 2.4 eV was known as one of
the promising photocatalysts for hydrogen production due to its sufficiently
negative flat-band potential of −0.87 V and its good absorption
capacity in the visible region of the solar spectrum.[4] For CdS, there is an issue of photocorrosion under prolonged
irradiation and it is necessary to dope noble metals on its surface
for efficient water splitting.Previous reports showed that
the Cd1–ZnS photocatalyst could achieve an apparent quantum yield (AQY)
of 0.6%[5] and Cd0.1Cu0.01Zn0.89S could improve the AQY to 9.6% in the absence of
Pt cocatalyst.[6] It was reported that a
novel thermal sulfuration method could effectively increase the AQY
to 10.23% for the Cd0.8Zn0.2S photocatalyst.[7] It was also suggested that doping Ni2+ ions into Cd1–ZnS solid solution could form a donor level above the
valence band of Cd1–ZnS by still maintaining its conduction band. This
tuning of the band structure could reduce its band gap and increase
its visible-light absorption, greatly by improving the AQY to 15.9%.[8] The photocurrent of the Cd0.8Zn0.2S photoanode was three times higher than that of pure CdS,
and the photocatalytic H2 evolution rate of Cd0.8Zn0.2S with 3 wt % Pt cocatalyst was observed as 3020
μmol g–1 h–1 under simulated
solar light irradiation.[9] By applying zirconium–titanium
phosphate in CdS–ZnS as a new composite material, a hydrogen
production amount of 2142.7 μmol with an AQY of 9.6% under visible
light was achieved.[10] In addition, a heterostructured
ZnS–CuS–CdS composite photocatalyst could cause a high
hydrogen production rate of 837.6 μmol g–1 h–1 under solar irradiation.[11] Hydrogen production from concentrated solar radiation was
examined by handling the CdS–ZnS photocatalyst in a continuous
flow reactor system and by presenting a wider spectrum capturing corresponding
to 18% of the incident energy.[12] Recently,
multinary copper-based chalcogenides photocatalysts, CuGaS2 and CuGaZnS, were reported to reinforce the charge separation and
transfer for enhancing photocatalytic hydrogen evolution.[13,14] For the photovoltaic application, the modified WO3-based
electrode was combined with a dye-sensitized solar cell to fabricate
tandem cells, showing higher photocurrent density compared with the
pristine WO3-based tandem cell.[15,16]Combinatorial chemistry could provide an effective method
for discovering and screening large numbers of diverse new materials
by different combinations of specific building block atoms and molecules.[17] This method has been applied in searching for
photocatalyst, gate dielectric and fuel cell catalyst materials.[18−20] The automated electrochemical synthesis was performed for screening
diverse metal-doped tungsten oxides (Ni–W mixed oxide)[21] and Zn0.956Co0.044O[22] with the optimal solar hydrogen production.
The other inkjet printing technique was also performed for screening
various metal oxide patterns which could be used as photocatalysts.[23,24] A method, scanning electrochemical microscopy (SECM)[25−27] with an optical fiber, was applied for rapid screening of several
metal oxide photocatalysts for water oxidation or hydrogen evolution.
Some studies reported that by using an ultramicro-electrode tip connected
to a xenon lamp, to replace an optical fiber for illuminating each
spot on a photocatalyst array, the photocurrents could be obtained
representing the activity of the photocatalyst.[28−34] Having considered all these, the aim of this work was to apply SECM
for screening 15 kinds of metal-modified In0.2Cd0.8S-based photocatalyst arrays in Na2SO4/Na2SO3 solution. The suitable Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S-based photocatalysts with optimum parameters were further
characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction
(XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), UV–visible spectroscopy
(UV–vis), steady-state photoluminescence spectroscopy (PL),
time-resolved PL spectroscopy, and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy
(EIS). The flat potentials of the photocatalysts were measured by
the Mott–Schottky method. The incident photon-to-current conversion
efficiencies (IPCEs) in 0.1 M Na2SO4/Na2SO3 solution were recorded via the lock-in technique.
Results and Discussion
SECM for Screening Photocatalyst Arrays
Figure shows the
SECM images of the metal-doped [(a) V, (b) Cr, (c) Mn, (d) Fe, (e)
Co, (f) Ni, (g) Cu, (h) Zn, (i) Mo, (j) Ru, (k) Ag, (l) W, (m) Ir,
(n) Pt, and (o) Te] In0.2Cd0.8S photocatalyst
arrays at an applied potential of 0 V versus Ag/AgCl in 0.1 M Na2SO4/0.1 M Na2SO3 solution
under UV–visible light illumination. Figure p presents the preprogrammed patterned photocatalyst
arrays composed of In0.2Cd0.8/metal mixture
precursors with a total volume of 15 drops for each spot, and the
ratio represents the volumes of In0.2Cd0.8 and
metal precursors (see Figure S1). The dark
brown color in spot indicated the higher photocurrent, whereas the
green color indicated the lower photocurrent. It was visually observed
that only by doping a Ag metal precursor (Figure k) in InCl3/Cd(CH3COO)2 mixed precursor solutions could enhance the photocatalytic
activity and photocurrent at a Ag composition of 30%. Doping the other
14 kinds of metal precursors indicated that the photocurrent was apparently
decreased starting from 10% doping percentage.
Figure 1
SECM images of the (a)
V-, (b) Cr-, (c) Mn-, (d) Fe-, (e) Co-, (f) Ni-, (g) Cu-, (h) Zn-,
(i) Mo-, (j) Ru-, (k) Ag-, (l) W-, (m) Ir-, (n) Pt-, and (o) Te-modified
In0.2Cd0.8S photocatalyst arrays at an applied
potential of 0 V vs Ag/AgCl in 0.1 M Na2SO3/0.1
M Na2SO4 solution under UV–visible light
illumination with a scan rate of 500 μm s–1. (p) Preprogrammed patterned photocatalyst composed of In0.2Cd0.8S/metal mixture precursors. Each patterned drop contains
a total volume of 15 drops.
SECM images of the (a)
V-, (b) Cr-, (c) Mn-, (d) Fe-, (e) Co-, (f) Ni-, (g) Cu-, (h) Zn-,
(i) Mo-, (j) Ru-, (k) Ag-, (l) W-, (m) Ir-, (n) Pt-, and (o) Te-modified
In0.2Cd0.8S photocatalyst arrays at an applied
potential of 0 V vs Ag/AgCl in 0.1 M Na2SO3/0.1
M Na2SO4 solution under UV–visible light
illumination with a scan rate of 500 μm s–1. (p) Preprogrammed patterned photocatalyst composed of In0.2Cd0.8S/metal mixture precursors. Each patterned drop contains
a total volume of 15 drops.
Photoelectrochemical Properties of an Electrode
in Bulk Film
Figure a shows the cyclic voltammogram curves of In0.2Cd0.8S electrode with an applied potential in the range
of −1.5 to 1.2 V versus Ag/AgCl in 0.1 M Na2SO4/Na2SO3 solution under dark, UV–visible
and visible-light illumination. It is observed that the n-type semiconductor,
In0.2Cd0.8S, electrode exhibits an enhanced
anodic current under light illumination. The applied onset potential
was about −0.97 V and the stable photocurrent was presented
in the potential region between −0.5 and 0.5 V. The current
for the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode significantly
increased under light illumination due to the splitting of water,
when the applied potential was more positive than 0.8 V. Thus, the
potential at 0 V was set as the applied potential for further screening
and photoelectrochemical measurements. Bulk Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S film was prepared as the electrode to confirm the SECM results
being applicable to large-scale films.
Figure 2
(a) Linear voltammetry
of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode under dark, UV–visible,
and visible-light illumination. (b) Photocurrent of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S electrodes at various atomic percent of Ag and
(c) chopped current time transient response of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrodes under UV–visible and visible-light
illumination. (d) IPCE plots of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrodes calculated from the photocurrents at 0 V vs Ag/AgCl.
(a) Linear voltammetry
of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode under dark, UV–visible,
and visible-light illumination. (b) Photocurrent of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S electrodes at various atomic percent of Ag and
(c) chopped current time transient response of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrodes under UV–visible and visible-light
illumination. (d) IPCE plots of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrodes calculated from the photocurrents at 0 V vs Ag/AgCl.Figure b shows the photocurrent obtained from Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S electrodes with different Ag volume percent doping illuminated
under UV–visible and visible lights. The results show that
the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode formed by doping 30% Ag has the highest photocurrent
under both UV–visible and visible lights. With the increasing
percentage of Ag above 30%, there was a drastic decrease in the photocurrent,
showing the consistent trend with the SECM screening results. Figure c represents the
current–time transient responses of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S electrodes under
chopped UV–visible and visible-light illumination. The anode
photocurrents of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode were
0.45 and 0.25 mA/cm2 at a bias of 0 V versus Ag/AgCl under
UV–visible and visible-light illumination, respectively. For
the Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S electrode, the photocurrents
could be increased to 1 and 0.53 mA/cm2 under UV–visible
and visible-light illumination, respectively. These results show that
the addition of Ag as the third metal component in photocatalyst could
effectively enhance the photocurrent of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S twice than that of In0.2Cd0.8S electrodes. Figure d represents the
IPCE plots of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrodes, which
were measured in a 0.1 M Na2SO4/Na2SO3 solution at 0 V versus Ag/AgCl under monochromatic
light irradiation. The IPCE was described in eq where iph is the
photocurrent density (mA/cm2), λ is the wavelength
(nm) of incident radiation, and Pin is
the incident light power density (mW/cm2) at the selected
wavelength. The In0.2Cd0.8S electrode displayed
high IPCE values of 57 and 21% at the wavelength of 400 and 500 nm,
respectively, whereas the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode showed an increasing IPCE values
to 61 and 42% at the corresponding wavelength, indicating a significant
improvement of photocatalytic efficiency.Figure a shows the UV–vis absorption spectroscopy
of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S, indicating that Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S has the enhanced
absorption than In0.2Cd0.8S in the UV and visible-light
ranges. The direct band gaps of In0.2Cd0.8S,
Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S
and Ag2S were determined by the intercept on the photon
energy axis in the Kubelka–Munk plot (see Figure S2). Figure b shows the steady-state PL spectra of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S with the excitation wavelength of 450 nm according
to the high absorbance value in UV–vis absorption spectroscopy.
There are two main PL peak at 522.8 nm for In0.2Cd0.8S and 528.4 nm for Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S. It can be seen that the PL emission intensity
of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S is significantly decreased, indicating the suppressed of recombination
of electrons and holes. This phenomenon could be resulted from the
formation of a heterojunction of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S and Ag2S favoring charge
transfer. We analyzed the charge recombination and obtained the carriers
lifetimes by using time-resolved PL spectroscopy to monitor the PL
decay (see Figure S3). The result shows
Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S
with a slower PL decay than In0.2Cd0.8S and
the carrier lifetimes are 11.2 and 14.0 ns for In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S, respectively. The longer decay time of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S is owing to the
further reduction of bulk recombination caused by the heterojunction
of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S and Ag2S.
Figure 3
(a) UV–vis absorption spectroscopy and
(b) PL spectroscopy of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S.
(a) UV–vis absorption spectroscopy and
(b) PL spectroscopy of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S.Figure a,b represents Mott–Schottky plots of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S bulk film electrodes at 3000 Hz in the dark condition
(C–2 vs E, where C is the space charge capacitance of the semiconductor electrode).
The flat-band potential could be estimated by the Mott–Schottky
equation (eq ).where C is the space charge
capacitance (F/cm2), q is the electronic
charge, ε is the dielectric constant for the semiconductor,
ε0 is the permittivity of free space (8.85 ×
10–14 F/cm), and Nd is
the carrier density (cm–3). V is
the applied potential (Volts) and Vfb is
the flat-band potential (Volts), k is the Boltzmann
constant and T represents the temperature (K). The
flat-band potential (Vfb) of the In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S estimated from intercepts of the Mott–Schottky
plots were about −0.85 and −0.55 V versus Ag/AgCl, respectively.
In addition, positive slopes of the curves confirmed that In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S films have electronic properties in n-type.
Figure 4
Mott–Schottky
plots of (a) In0.2Cd0.8S and (b) Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst at
3000 Hz.
Mott–Schottky
plots of (a) In0.2Cd0.8S and (b) Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst at
3000 Hz.We also performed EIS to study the interfacial
properties between the photocatalyst electrodes and electrolyte solutions
in the dark measured at 0 V versus Ag/AgCl. In Figure , EIS plots of both In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S present wide impedance arcs, which suggests that few charges
could pass through the interface between the photoanode and electrolyte
in the dark condition. Compared with the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode, the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode presents a smaller impedance arc, representing
a small interface transfer resistance which may be caused by the larger
electrochemical active surface area.[15]
Figure 5
EIS plots
In0.2Cd0.8S, and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst in the dark measured
at 0 V vs Ag/AgCl.
EIS plots
In0.2Cd0.8S, and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst in the dark measured
at 0 V vs Ag/AgCl.
Characterization of Photocatalyst Arrays
Figure shows the
SEM images of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S (x = 0–0.9) and Ag2S spots in photocatalyst arrays.
Without the addition of Ag precursor, the In0.2Cd0.8S film displayed a compact dense morphology as shown in Figure a. On doping 10%
Ag precursor in InCl3/Cd(CH3COO)2 mixed solution, the Ag0.1(In0.2Cd0.8)0.9S film exhibited small granular aggregates as shown
in Figure b. Larger
granular aggregates were formed in the Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S film with the increasing doping ratio of Ag. It was observed
that the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S film [Figure d]
could extensively represent the continuous aggregate structure covered
with small granular particles. Table shows the actual compositions of each final Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S and Ag2S films determined by energy-dispersive
X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) which were very close to the elemental stoichiometry
of the molar ratio.
Figure 6
SEM images (100 000×) of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S with various atomic percent of Ag: (a) x = 0, (b) x = 0.1, (c) x = 0.2,
(d) x = 0.3, (e) x = 0.4, (f) x = 0.5, (g) x = 0.6, (h) x = 0.7, (i) x = 0.8, (j) x = 0.9
and (k) Ag2S and its spot position on photocatalyst arrays.
Table 1
Actual Composition of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S Spots in Arrays Measured by EDX
spot
actual atomic ratio (Ag:In:Cd:S)
In0.2Cd0.8S
(0:10:39:51)
Ag0.1(In0.2Cd0.8)0.9S
(5:8:36:51)
Ag0.2(In0.2Cd0.8)0.8S
(10:8:34:48)
Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S
(16:8:28:48)
Ag0.4(In0.2Cd0.8)0.6S
(19:7:26:48)
Ag0.5(In0.2Cd0.8)0.5S
(25:5:21:49)
Ag0.6(In0.2Cd0.8)0.4S
(29:5:18:48)
Ag0.7(In0.2Cd0.8)0.3S
(36:3:12:49)
Ag0.8(In0.2Cd0.8)0.2S
(39:2:8:51)
Ag0.9(In0.2Cd0.8)0.1S
(45:1:5:49)
Ag2S
(51:0:0:49)
SEM images (100 000×) of Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S with various atomic percent of Ag: (a) x = 0, (b) x = 0.1, (c) x = 0.2,
(d) x = 0.3, (e) x = 0.4, (f) x = 0.5, (g) x = 0.6, (h) x = 0.7, (i) x = 0.8, (j) x = 0.9
and (k) Ag2S and its spot position on photocatalyst arrays.Figure shows the XRD profiles of the In0.2Cd0.8S,
Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S (x = 0.1, 0.3,
0.5, 0.7, and 0.9) films on fluorine-doped tin oxide (FTO)-coated
glass substrates and standard reference of CdS (JCPDS #41-1049) and
Ag2S (JCPDS #14-0072). The In0.2Cd0.8S exhibited several peaks at 2θ of 24.82, 26.54, 28.29, 43.79,
and 47.90°, corresponding to 24.8° (100), 26.5° (002),
28.18° (101), 43.68° (110), and 47.84° (103) planes
of wurtzite CdS (JCPDS #41-1049), respectively. The other two peaks
at 37.70 and 51.49° were attributed from the FTO substrate (label
as circles). The shift in the peaks could be explained based on the
reason that both the In2S3 and CdS could be
merged into each other with homogeneously distributed Cd and In atoms
in a solid solution. For the Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S
film (x = 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7 and 0.9), main peaks
of wurtzite structured CdS corresponding to (100), (002), (101), (110),
and (103) planes (label as triangles) still remained in the same positions.
In addition, there were some extra peaks at 31.55, 33.67, 37.10, and
37.74° (label as stars) which could be indexed to the crystal
structure of Ag2S. When increasing the Ag doping amount,
the intensities of (100) and (101) planes in wurtzite CdS are gradually
decreased and are absent in Ag0.7(In0.2Cd0.8)0.3S and Ag0.9(In0.2Cd0.8)0.1S. Three peaks at 31.55, 37.10, and 37.74°
corresponding to Ag2S phase observed in Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S shows the lowest
doping amount of Ag in 30%, and the enhanced peak intensities in high
Ag doping amount suggest that the Ag-doped (In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalysts possessed lager grains and
higher crystallinity.
Figure 7
XRD profiles of the In0.2Cd0.8S,
Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S (x = 0.1, 0.3,
0.5, 0.7, and 0.9) films and bare FTO substrate.
XRD profiles of the In0.2Cd0.8S,
Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S (x = 0.1, 0.3,
0.5, 0.7, and 0.9) films and bare FTO substrate.Figure a–d shows the chemical binding states of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalysts determined by XPS. The XPS spectra
of S 2p (Figure a)
for the In0.2Cd0.8S represented the binding
energies of S 2p3/2 and S 2p1/2 at 161.2 (monosulfide)
and 162.2 (disulfide),[35] respectively.
For the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S, the binding energies of the chemical states of S 2p3/2 and S 2p1/2 were identical to those of the In0.2Cd0.8S. The XPS spectra of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S. Figure b shows two peaks at 367.2 eV (Ag 3d5/2) and 373.2 eV (Ag 3d3/2), corresponding to Ag2S.[35]Figure c shows that both In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalysts could present two main peaks at 404.8 eV
(Cd 3d5/2) and 411.4 eV (Cd 3d3/2), indicating
the presence of the Cd2+ state in CdS.[36] The peak intensities of Cd 3d in Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S were reduced significantly
compared to that of intensities in In0.2Cd0.8S. The XPS spectra of both In0.2Cd0.8S and
Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S
photocatalysts displayed two main peaks at 444.8 eV (In 3d5/2) and 452.2 eV (In 3d3/2) as shown in Figure d. In contrast to the Cd 3d
intensity, the peak intensities of In 3d in Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S were enhanced significantly
compared to that of In0.2Cd0.8S.
Figure 8
XPS profiles of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalysts corresponding to (a) S 2p,
(b) Ag 3d, (c) Cd 3d, and (d) In 3d.
XPS profiles of In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalysts corresponding to (a) S 2p,
(b) Ag 3d, (c) Cd 3d, and (d) In 3d.Figure illustrates the charge excitation and transfer mechanisms
based on the characterization results. Under the light irradiation,
electrons in Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst were excited to the conductive band and
holes left in the valence band. The photoinduced electrons were rapidly
transported to the external circuit through the FTO substrate while
the holes were transported to Ag2S for reacting with SO32– and hydroxyl group to produce SO42– and oxygen. After doping the Ag metal
ions to form Ag(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S solid solution,
the enhanced photocatalytic activity was contributed to the higher
photoabsorption in the visible region and higher crystallinity quality
with fewer defects, which was beneficial for the photoinduced charge
separation, and thus, the probability of charge recombination was
reduced.
Figure 9
Schematic diagram of the charge-transfer process in a Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S–Ag2S heterostructured photocatalyst.
Schematic diagram of the charge-transfer process in a Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S–Ag2S heterostructured photocatalyst.
Conclusions
The composition of M(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S (M = V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mo, Ru, Ag,
W, Ir, Pt, and Te) photocatalyst arrays were screened by the SECM
method to determine that doping 30% Ag to form the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode could
result in the highest photocurrent among these 15 kinds of metal-doped
M(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S photocatalysts. The anode photocurrents
of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S electrode were found to be 1 and 0.53 mA/cm2 under UV–visible
and visible light, respectively, which were comparatively higher than
that of the In0.2Cd0.8S electrode (0.45 and
0.25 mA/cm2). The highest IPCE value of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photocatalyst and
In0.2Cd0.8S were found to be 64% (λ =
450 nm) and 57% (λ = 400 nm), respectively. The Mott–Schottky
plots showed that In0.2Cd0.8S and Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrode
could exhibit a flat-band potential of −0.85 and −0.55
V versus Ag/AgCl, respectively. The XRD diffraction profile of Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S films
shows main peaks corresponding to (100), (002), (101), (110), and
(103) of the wurtzite structured CdS and other small peaks at 31.55,
33.67, 37.10, and 37.74° indexed to the crystal structure of
Ag2S. This study suggests that the superior photocatalytic
activity of the Ag0.3(In0.2Cd0.8)0.7S photoelectrode was mainly attributed to its high crystallinity
for promoting charge separation and reducing the probability of charge
recombination.
Experimental Section
Precursor Solutions
Three stock solutions
were prepared by dissolving 0.1 M InCl3 (Sigma-Aldrich),
0.1 M Cd(CH3COO)2 (Fisher), and 0.2 M CH4N2S (Showa) in water–glycerol (3:1) solutions.
The In–Cd–S mixed precursors were prepared by mixing
InCl3, Cd(CH3COO)2 and CH4N2S solutions in a volume ratio of 0.2:0.8:1. For the
screening test, 15 different metal salts solutions (0.1 M), VCl2·xH2O, Cr(NO3)3·9H2O, Mn(NO3)2, Fe(NO3)3·9H2O, Co(NO3)2·6H2O, Ni(NO3)2·6H2O, CuSO4·5H2O, Zn(NO3)2·6H2O, (NH4)6Mo7O24·4H2O, RuCl3·xH2O, AgNO3, (NH4)6W12O39, IrCl4, and TeCl4 were prepared in water–glycerol (3:1) solutions. All
chemicals were of reagent grade and used as received.
Screening of Photocatalyst Arrays
Prior to their use, the conducting substrates, FTO-coated glasses
(15 × 30 × 2.2 mm3, Chang Shuan Electronics Co.)
were sonicated and rinsed thoroughly with isopropanol and water. The
photocatalyst arrays consisting of mixed salt solutions were deposited
on FTO glasses using a piezo-based microarray dispenser (CHI model
1550, CH Instruments). The FTO substrate was placed under a picolitre
piezodispenser (Micro Jet AB-01-60, Micro Fab Plano, TX), and the
position was controlled by XYZ stepping motors in a preprogrammed
pattern. The voltage pulse of 100 V was applied to the piezodispenser
to eject the desired number of drops of precursor solutions onto the
substrate. First, the InCl3/Cd(CH3COO)2 mixed precursor solutions were dispensed, and then, the thiourea
was dispensed in the second time as the preprogrammed pattern (see Figure S1). Finally, the metal precursor solutions
were dispensed the third time. The total volume of each spot in photocatalyst
arrays remained constant. There was a special case for preparing the
Ru(In0.2Cd0.8S)1– array which required a higher voltage
pulse of 150 V due to the higher viscosity. The photocatalyst arrays
containing different ratios of In/Cd mixed to metal precursor solutions
were agitated for 5 min using an agitator and kept at 100 °C
for 12 h in a furnace under an argon atmosphere to form M(In0.2Cd0.8)1–S films (M: metal).Then, screening measurements
were performed by SECM (CHI Instruments 900C) with an optical fiber
as described in the previous report.[37] A
200 μm optical fiber (FIA-P200-SR, Ocean Optics) connected to
a 150 W xenon lamp (SXE-150, Collimage International Co.) was attached
to the tip holder of the SECM. The FTO substrate with photocatalyst
arrays on the surface was placed in an SECM cell with its surface
exposed at the bottom through an O-ring. A Pt wire and saturated Ag/AgCl
electrode were used as the counter and reference electrodes, respectively.
The electrolyte solution is 0.1 M Na2SO4/Na2SO3 (pH = 9.6), and the Na2SO3 was prepared as the sacrificial donor. The optical fiber was positioned
perpendicular to the array surface at a distance of 100 μm and
scanned across the surface at a speed of 500 μm/s. The substrate
potential was held at 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, and a filter with a wavelength
of 420 nm was used to block the UV light in the visible-light illumination
experiments. The photocurrent produced during the scan was recorded
and displayed as a two-dimensional image.
Photoelectrochemical Measurements of Electrodes
in Bulk Films
According to the photocurrents of arrays in
SECM results, a specific composition of mixed precursor solutions
was determined for drop-casting on FTO substrates and annealing at
200 °C for 12 h forming the In0.2Cd0.8S
bulk film as the photoelectrode (working electrode). The In0.2Cd0.8S working electrode, a reference electrode (Ag/AgCl)
and counter electrode (Pt strip) were placed in a three-electrode
cell which was filled with 0.1 M Na2SO4/Na2SO3 solution as the electrolyte. This three-electrode
cell was irradiated by a Xe lamp to obtain the photocurrent curve.
In addition, the flat-band potential and carrier density of the electrodes
in bulk film were estimated from Mott–Schottky measurements
performed by EIS. Additional characterizations were performed by XRD
(D8, Bruker), UV–vis spectroscopy (V-650, JASCO), PL spectroscopy
(F-7000, HITACHI), time-resolved PL spectroscopy, and XPS (Phi 5000
VersaProbe, ULVAC).
Authors: Thomas F Jaramillo; Sung-Hyeon Baeck; Alan Kleiman-Shwarsctein; Kyoung-Shin Choi; Galen D Stucky; Eric W McFarland Journal: J Comb Chem Date: 2005 Mar-Apr