4.8 Article

New Visible-Light-Driven H2- and O2-Evolving Photocatalysts Developed by Ag(I) and Cu(I) Ion Exchange of Various Layered and Tunneling Metal Oxides Using Molten Salts Treatments

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 32, 期 24, 页码 10524-10537

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c03461

关键词

-

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [17H01217, 17H06438, 17H06440, 17H06433]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17H01217, 17H06438, 17H06440] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ag(I) and Cu(I) ions were exchanged for alkali ions in various wide-band-gap metal oxides with layered and tunneling structures for sensitization to visible light. Crystal structures of many Cu(I)-ion-exchanged materials were similar to those of Ag(I)-ion-exchanged materials when the same host materials were used. The ion-exchanged materials possessed new absorption bands at longer wavelength regions than their host materials because of contributions of Ag 4d and Cu 3d orbitals to the valence band maxima of the ion-exchanged materials. Some Ag(I)-ion-exchanged materials, Ag(I)-A(2)SrTa(2)O(7) (A = Li, K), Ag(1)-K2SrNb0.2Ta1.8O7, Ag(I)-K2CaNaNb3O10, and Ag(I)-KLaNb2O7 showed activities for photocatalytic O-2 evolution from an aqueous solution containing a sacrificial electron acceptor under visible-light irradiation. When Ruddlesden-Popper-type layered perovskite metal oxides consisting of Ti(IV) or Ta(V) in the perovskite slabs and K(I) in the interlayers were used as a host material, the Cu(I)-ion-exchanged materials showed high activities for photocatalytic H-2 evolution from an aqueous solution containing sacrificial electron donors under visible-light irradiation. On the other hand, when the other host materials were used as a host material, almost all Cu(I)-ion-exchanged materials hardly showed the activities. The Cu(I)-ion-exchanged metal oxides with a tunneling structure (Li2MSr6O14 (M = Na-2, Sr, Ba, Pb)) instead of layered materials were successfully synthesized and responded to visible light.

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

4.8
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