Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
TiO₂ composites with seven different carbon materials (activated carbons, graphite, carbon fibers, single-walled carbon nanotubes, multi-walled carbon nanotubes, graphene oxides, and reduced graphene oxides) that are virgin or treated with nitric acid are prepared through an evaporation method. The photocatalytic activities of the as-prepared samples are evaluated in terms of H₂ production from aqueous methanol solution (photo-catalytic reduction: PCR) and degradation of aqueous pollutants (phenol, methylene blue, and rhodamine B) (photocatalytic oxidation: PCO) under AM 1.5-light irradiation. Despite varying effects depending on the kinds of carbon materials and their surface treatment, composites typically show enhanced PCR activity with maximum 50 times higher H₂ production as compared to bare TiO₂ . Conversely, the carbon-induced synergy effects on PCO activities are insignificant for all three substrates. Colorimetric quantification of hydroxyl radicals supports the absence of carbon effects. However, platinum deposition on the binary composites displays the enhanced effect on both PCR and PCO reactions. These differing effects of carbon materials on PCR and PCO reactions of TiO₂ are discussed in terms of physicochemical properties of carbon materials, coupling states of TiO₂ /carbon composites, interfacial charge transfers. Various surface characterizations of composites (UV-Vis diffuse reflectance, SEM, FTIR, surface area, electrical conductivity, and photoluminescence) are performed to gain insight on their photocatalytic redox behaviors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khan et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: