4.3 Article

Superior energy band structure and retarded charge recombination for Anatase N, B codoped nano-crystalline TiO2 anodes in dye-sensitized solar cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY
卷 22, 期 18, 页码 9123-9130

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2jm16896k

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2011CBA00700]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2011AA050527]
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences [GJHZ1220]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21173227, 21173228]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work reports the preparation of N, B codoped TiO2 (N, B-TiO2) electrodes in dye-sensitized solar cells (DSCs) by a facial modified sol-gel method. After the nitrogen and boron dopants incorporated into the TiO2 electrodes, the cubic-like TiO2 nanocrystallites with diameters of 22 similar to 24 nm were obtained efficiently. The back electron transfer of the DSC based on the N, B-TiO2 electrode was studied by measuring the electrochemistry impedance spectra (EIS) and the EIS for the DSCs showed that the enhanced electron lifetime for the dye-sensitized B, N-TiO2 solar cells could be attributed to the formation of an O-Ti-B-N bond in the TiO2 photoelectrode, which retards electron recombination at the dyed N, B-TiO2 photoelectrode/electrolyte interface after N, B codoping as compared to the undoped DSC. We found that a high efficiency of 8.4% for the DSC (active area: 4 cm(2)) based on the N, B-TiO2 anode under 0.2 sun illumination was received. In particular, the photovoltaic performance of the DSC under high temperature conditions (60 degrees C) and one-sun light soaking over a time of more than 1100 h showed that the DSC based on the N, B-TiO2 electrode exhibited a better stability compared to the undoped DSC. The excellent photoelectrochemical performance could be attributed to the ideal combination of retarded electron recombination and superior energy band structure from the unique N, B-TiO2 particle structure.

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

4.3
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