| Literature DB >> 35160788 |
Patricia Reñones1, Fernando Fresno1, Freddy E Oropeza1, Víctor A de la Peña O'Shea1.
Abstract
In this work, the role of In2O3 in a heterojunction with TiO2 is studied as a way of increasing the photocatalytic activity for gas-phase CO2 reduction using water as the electron donor and UV irradiation. Depending on the nature of the employed In2O3, different behaviors appear. Thus, with the high crystallite sizes of commercial In2O3, the activity is improved with respect to TiO2, with modest improvements in the selectivity to methane. On the other hand, when In2O3 obtained in the laboratory, with low crystallite size, is employed, there is a further change in selectivity toward CH4, even if the total conversion is lower than that obtained with TiO2. The selectivity improvement in the heterojunctions is attributed to an enhancement in the charge transfer and separation with the presence of In2O3, more pronounced when smaller particles are used as in the case of laboratory-made In2O3, as confirmed by time-resolved fluorescence measurements. Ternary systems formed by these heterojunctions with silver nanoparticles reflect a drastic change in selectivity toward methane, confirming the role of silver as an electron collector that favors the charge transfer to the reaction medium.Entities:
Keywords: CO2; artificial photosynthesis; heterojunction; indium dioxide; photocatalysis; titanium dioxide
Year: 2022 PMID: 35160788 PMCID: PMC8837040 DOI: 10.3390/ma15030843
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Main physicochemical characteristics of the studied catalysts.
| Catalyst | Bulk In (wt.%) a | Surface In (wt.%) b | Bulk Ag (wt.%) a | Surface Ag (wt.%) b | SBET (m2/g) | In2O3 Crystallite Size (nm) | TiO2 Cell Parameters (Å) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a = b | c | |||||||
|
| - | - | - | - | 112 | - | 3.7844 | 9.5088 |
|
| 1.11 ± 0.06 | 1.3 | - | - | 121 | 105 | 3.7836 | 9.5072 |
|
| 4.6 ± 0.2 | 4.0 | - | - | 119 | 68 | 3.7839 | 9.508 |
|
| 9.1 ± 0.5 | 9.5 | - | - | 115 | 83 | 3.7826 | 9.5094 |
|
| 0.89 ± 0.04 | 0.7 | - | - | 101 | 13 | 3.7811 | 9.5082 |
|
| 4.0 ± 0.2 | n.m. | - | - | 104 | 15 | 3.7849 | 9.5106 |
|
| 9.4 ± 0.4 | 10.5 | - | - | 100 | 16 | 3.7838 | 9.508 |
|
| 0.73 ± 0.04 | n.m. | 0.76 ± 0.04 | 3.1 | 109 | 78 | 3.7839 | 9.5079 |
|
| 0.73 ± 0.04 | n.m. | 0.79 ± 0.04 | 2.3 | 90 | 16 | 3.7841 | 9.5076 |
a From ICP-OES. b From XPS in the Ti 2p and In 3d regions and respective sensitivity factors. n.m.: not measured.
Figure 1X-ray diffractograms of (a) c-series and (b) p-series catalysts. The identified phases are differentiated with symbols: ●TiO2 (ICCD-PDF: 01-084-1286) and ■ In2O3 (ICCD-PDF: 01-071-2195), and their Miller indices are included.
Figure 2TEM micrographs of 1In2O3-c/TiO2 and 1In2O3-p/TiO2 catalysts.
Figure 3UV/Vis diffuse reflectance spectra of all catalysts studied compared to TiO2: (a) c-series, (b) p-series, and (c,d) ternary catalysts compared to their binary counterparts.
Figure 4Fluorescence decay curves (main graphs) and fluorescence lifetimes obtained from fittings (insets), for the c-series (a) and the p-series (b) catalysts. Dotted lines represent the instrument response function.
Figure 5(a) Cumulative production of the main products obtained with different catalysts in the CO2 + H2O reaction after 15 h under UV light. (b) C-selectivities (%) toward CH4 in the same reaction.