4.8 Article

Calcium Niobate Nanosheets Prepared by the Polymerized Complex Method as Catalytic Materials for Photochemical Hydrogen Evolution

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 21, 期 15, 页码 3611-3617

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cm9007766

关键词

-

资金

  1. Pennsylvania State University
  2. Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Energy Biosciences, Department of Energy [DE-FG02-07ER15911]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Dion-Jacobson phase niobate perovskite, KCa2Nb3O10, was prepared by the polymerized complex (PC) method. The corresponding proton-exchanged material, HCa2Nb3O10, was then exfoliated by reaction with tetra(n-butyl)ammonium hydroxide (TBA(+) OH-), yielding unilamellar colloidal nanosheets whose lateral dimensions increased with the final calcination temperature in the PC synthesis. By restacking the TBA(+)-stabilized nanosheets with hydrochloric acid, aggregates of HCa2Nb3O10 nanosheets were obtained and tested as photocatalytic materials. The rate of H-2 production from aqueous methanol solution under band gap irradiation (lambda>300 nm) was dependent on the calcination temperature. The best materials, prepared by the PC method at the intermediate calcination temperature of 1273 K, had higher activity than those made by a conventional solid state reaction. In contrast, the rate of visible-fight hydrogen evolution (lambda = 450 +/- 20 nm) from aqueous ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution with materials sensitized by [Ru(bpy)(2)(4,4'-(PO3H2)(2)bpy)](PF6)(2) (abbreviated RuP2+) Was essentially insensitive to the preparation conditions. These results Suggest that increasing the crystallinity of the nanosheets enhances their activity under band gap irradiation, where catalytic reactions compete with electron-hole recombination within the nanosheet. In contrast, the quantum yield for sensitized H-2 production is primarily governed by electron injection efficiency from the excited-state sensitizer into the nanosheet.

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