4.6 Review

Advances in the Synthesis of Mesoporous Carbon Nitride Materials

期刊

ACTA PHYSICO-CHIMICA SINICA
卷 32, 期 8, 页码 1913-1928

出版社

PEKING UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201605052

关键词

Graphitic carbon nitride; Mesoporous material; Nanocasting method; Hard-templating method; Soft-templating method

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21203014]
  2. Postgraduate Innovation Project of Jiangsu Province, China [KYLX14_1097, KYLX15_1119]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions, China
  4. Advanced Catalysis and Green Manufacturing Collaborative Innovation Center, China [ACGM2016-06-28]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graphitic carbon nitride (g-C3N4) is a new metal-free material. Owing to its multiple unique physicochemical properties, g-C3N4 has promising applications in various research fields, including heterogeneous catalysis, photocatalysis, fuel cells, and gas storage. Compared with bulk g-C3N4 prepared via direct thermal condensation, mesoporous g-C3N4 possesses a higher surface area and abundant accessible mesoporous pores. These features expose many more surface active sites, thereby improving the performance of this material in catalysis as well as in other applications. Thermal condensation is the most convenient strategy to prepare g-C3N4 and, when fabricating mesoporous g-C3N4, one may employ hard-, soft-, or non-templating method. This paper reviews recent advances in the synthesis of mesoporous g-C3N4 using all three routes. Specifically, several crucial issues regarding the hard-templating method are discussed with regard to the synthetic mechanism associated with various precursors and the physicochemical properties of the g-C3N4 products. Novel soft- and non-templating approaches for the preparation of mesoporous g-C3N4 are also addressed and a detailed comparison to the hard-templating method is provided. Finally, future prospects for the development of mesoporous g-C3N4 materials are also assessed.

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

4.6
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