Anion doping to titanium oxide (TiO 2 ) has been extensively studied to explore visible light-responsive photocatalysts. Among them, sulfur doping was most effective; however, the site structure and the implication to promoted photocatalysis have not been reported yet, except for valence state information based on X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Sulfur and/or nitrogen was doped to TiO 2 with a narrow pore size distribution, at 3 nm, using thiourea or urea. They were compared to the uniform mesoporous TiO 2 modified via the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) of hydrogen sulfide and the titanate/TiO 2 nanotube synthesized hydrothermally using TiS 2 . In ethanol and O 2 under visible light (wavelengths of >370, >420, >480, >520, or >580 nm), water formation was promoted by a factor of 12, in clear contrast to the only 2.3× enhancement for acetaldehyde formation by doping sulfur. These anion-doped mesoporous TiO 2 catalysts were characterized using Ti and S K-edge extended X-ray absorption fine structure for the first time. The Ti−S bonds were detected at 2.283−2.44 Å for sulfur-doped mesoporous TiO 2 using thiourea and sulfur-doped mesoporous TiO 2 via CVD, demonstrating the presence of substitutional anionic S on the O sites. The doped anionic sulfur created impurity level(s) at 0.8−2.2 eV below the conduction band (CB) minimum of mesoporous TiO 2 . It enabled the electron excitation to the CB and then to O 2 to convert to water under visible light. In contrast, the impurity level(s) at 0.8−2.2 eV below the CB minimum was/were not effective to (directly or indirectly) receive electrons from the substrate (ethanol/ethoxyl). Preferential water formation under visible light was also observed for TiO 2 nanotubes that were synthesized hydrothermally from TiS 2 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Izumi et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: