4.7 Article

Elucidating the predominant role of crystal disorders in hierarchical photocatalysts governing their charge carrier separation and associated activity in photocatalytic water treatment

期刊

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
卷 573, 期 -, 页码 336-347

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2020.04.020

关键词

Charge carrier separation; Crystal disorder; Defect engineering; Hierarchical photocatalyst; Personal care product; Photocatalytic water treatment

资金

  1. Research Grants Council of the HKSAR [16200117]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The superiority of a hierarchical photocatalyst for water treatment applications is mostly rationalized in terms of two features: light harvestability and adsorption capability. Not only a conclusive evidence to support these claims is missing, knowledge on the 'key material property' governing photocatalyst performance is also unclear. Herein, a hierarchical BiOBr photocatalyst was studied in comparison with its plate-like counterpart. Found from the photocatalytic water treatment experiments, the hierarchical BiOBr exhibited three times faster reaction kinetics compared to the plate-like BiOBr. While light harvestability and adsorption capability of the two structures was not significantly different, a ca. 36% higher photocurrent and a ca. 16% longer charge carrier lifetime observed in hierarchical BiOBr demonstrated its superior charge carrier separability. Compared to other material properties, crystal disorders were found to predominantly influence the photocatalytic activity, which was verified through Raman spectroscopy, high resolution transmission electron microscopy, and X-ray diffraction analyses. The findings provide an insight into the role of crystallographic disorders in hierarchical photocatalysts which is a useful advancement towards the pursuit of rational photocatalyst design particularly for interfacial photocatalytic water treatment applications. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. 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