Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Supplementary Information
Enhanced CO2 Photoreduction by Graphene-Porphyrin Metal-
Organic Framework under Visible Light Irradiation
Nasrin Sadeghia,b, Shahram Sharifniaa, Trong-On DOb,*
a Catalyst Research Center, Chemical Engineering Department, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.
b Department of Chemical Engineering, Laval University, Quebec, G1V0A8, Canada.
Email: [email protected]
Electronic Supplementary Material (ESI) for Journal of Materials Chemistry A.This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2018
2
1. Experimental Details
1.1. Materials
Tetrakis (4-carboxyphenyl) porphyrin (TCPP) was purchased from TCI AMERICA.
Graphene oxide (GO) was supplied by Graphenea. Aluminum chloride, ammonium
hydroxide, triethanolamine (TEOA) and ethylene glycol were purchased from Fluka,
Caledon, Alfa and Sigma-Aldrich, respectively. Aceton and dimethylformamide (DMF) were
supplied by Fisher Chemical. All chemicals were used as received without further
purification. The deionized water was used in catalyst preparation. The used CO2 gas was
ultra-high pure (99%).
1.2. Preparation of NH2-Graphene
100 mg of GO was added to 40 mL of ethylene glycol under ultrasonication. After a
while, 1 mL of ammonia water was added and the solution was transferred to a Teflon lined
autoclave for solvothermal reaction at 180 °C for 10 h. The resulting precipitate was filtered,
repeatedly washed with distilled water and dried at 60 °C for 24 h 1.
1.3. Preparation of Al-PMOF
Al-PMOF was synthesized according to the way provided in previous papers 2, 3. 400 mg
of TCPP and 130 mg AlCl3 were introduced into 40 mL deionized water. The solution was
stirred for 30 min at room temperature and then transferred to a Teflon lined autoclave and
heated at 180 °C for 24 h. The solution was allowed to cool down to room temperature. The
solid was recovered by centrifugation and washed with DMF and acetone several times in
order to remove the unreacted porphyrin. Finally, the obtained solid was dried at 60 °C.
3
1.4. Preparation of NH2-Graphene/Al-PMOF
400 mg of TCPP and 130 mg AlCl3 were introduced into 40 mL deionized water.
Varying amount of NH2-Graphene (5, 15, 25 wt %: based on the total mass of starting solid
materials) was added to the solution. The solution was stirred for 30 min at room temperature
and then transferred to a Teflon lined autoclave and heated at 180 °C for 24 h. The solution
was allowed to cool down to room temperature. The solid was recovered by centrifugation
and washed with DMF and acetone several times. Finally, the obtained solid was dried at 60
°C.
1.5. Catalyst characterization
Powder XRD patterns were recorded on Bruker SMART APEXII X-ray diffractometer
equipped with Cu Kα radiation source (λ = 1.5418 Å). N2 adsorption-desorption isotherms of
the samples were obtained at 77 K using a Quantachrome Autosorb-1MP analyzer. Prior to
the measurements, the samples were outgassed under vacuum for 6 h at 150 °C. Scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained using a JEOL 6360 operated at 15 kV. X-
ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurements were carried out in the ion-pumped
chamber (evacuated to 10-9 Torr) of a photoelectron spectrometer (Kratos Axis-Ultra)
equipped with a focused X-ray source (Al Kα, hυ = 1486.6 eV). UV-vis spectra were
recorded on a Cary 300 Bio UV-visible spectrophotometer. The Fourier transform infrared
spectroscopy (FTIR) was recorded with an ALPHA (Bruker, Germany) FTIR
spectrophotometer. Samples of 1–2 mg were mixed with 100 mg KBr and pressed into
translucent disks at room temperature. All spectra were taken in the range 400-4000 cm-1 at a
resolution of 4 cm-1. The photoluminescence (PL) spectra of samples were carried out with a
Varian Cary Eclipse fluorescence spectrophotometer (excitation wavelength: 420 nm). The
diffuse reflection spectroscopy (DRS) of the powders was obtained by using Avantes
4
spectrometer (Avaspec-2048-TEC) with a reflectance sphere in the range, 300-900 nm. In
order to perform electrochemical measurements, the working electrodes were prepared by
adding 15 µL of slurry to the surface of fluride-tin oxide (FTO) glass plates and covering
approximately 1 cm2. The slurry was prepared by mixing 0.02 g ample and 2 mL ethanol.
Electrochemical measurements were conducted with an Ivinum-Vertex Electrochemical
system in a conventional three-electrode cell, using a Pt plate as the counter electrode and
Hg/HgCl2 electrode (3 M KCl) as the reference electrode. The experiments were performed at
room temperature in 0.2 M Na2SO4 electrolyte deoxygenated using N2 stream.
1.6. Photoreactor system
Fig. S1 illustrates the schematic of the experimental setup for photocatalytic activity
measurement of synthesized photocatalysts. CO2 Photoreduction was carried out in an outer
irradiation-type quartz photoreactor designed by our laboratory. In order to control
temperature, the photoreactor was equipped with a condenser which was connected to the
cooling water recirculation system. The solution temperature was kept constant at 30 °C.
Herein, a set of three 125 W medium-pressure mercury lamp was used as the light source,
which are located externally around the photoreactor. To filter out UV light, a glass bulb with
special coating was applied (Osram GmbH, Germany). Typically, 50 mg of the photocatalyst
was dispersed in a solution containing MeCN and TEOA (60 ml, 5:1 v/v) by a magnetic
stirrer during the 6 h irradiation. Then, the photoreactor was sealed and prior to the
irradiation, the mixture was degassed by CO2 for about 30 min to ensure all impurities and
trapped air were completely removed. The products in the liquid phase were analyzed using a
HPLC (Agilent 1200) with Kromasil 5u C18 column. In order to detect alcohols, the reaction
solution has been analyzed with a gas chromatography system (Agilent) equipped with a DB-
5 column and a flame ionization detector (FID). No signal for alcohols can be detected.
5
Moreover, the gaseous products (CH4, CO) were examined by using an online commercial
gas chromatograph GC-CGCA-1 apparatus. These analyses were done isothermally at 50 °C
using a parallel setup of two packed columns (Molecular sieve and Propak Q). No signal can
also be observed for gaseous products.
Fig. S1. Schematic of experimental setup
6
Fig. S2. SEM images of (a) GO, (b) NH2-rGO, (c) Al-PMOF and (d) NH2-rGO (5 wt %)/Al-
PMOF, (e) NH2-rGO (15 wt %)/Al-PMOF, (f) NH2-rGO (25 wt %)/Al-PMOF.
The morphology of as prepared composites was analyzed by SEM. For comparison, the
SEM images of GO, NH2-rGO and Al-PMOF are also included. As illustrated in Fig. S2(b),
the NH2-rGO consist of randomly aggregated thin sheets that are closely associated and
forming a porous and disordered network. In the Al-PMOF sample (Fig. S2 (c)), the cubic
d
e
f
c
a
b
7
crystals of Al-PMOF are visible. Fig. S2 (d) demonstrates that the presence of the NH2-rGO
in the sample lead to change the cubic structures of Al-PMOF to platelets. As shown in Fig.
S2 (e and f), with increasing the content of NH2-rGO in the sample, the thin platelets more
agglomerated and decreased the crystallinity of the structure as shown in XRD. Notably,
graphene-based materials have extraordinary properties, such as large surface area, high
electrical conductivity, also, graphene acts as electron acceptor-transporter. Therefore, the
platelets structures increase the electrons generation, also, accessibility to the CO2 molecules,
consequently resulting in enhancement in CO2 photoreduction. Nevertheless, the overloading
of graphene can cause a negative effect on the photocatalytic reaction. With increasing the
content of NH2-rGO in the sample, the thin platelets more agglomerated and decrease the
crystallinity of the structure. In other words, when the amount of the graphene increased in
the structure, the Al-PMOF molecules were wrapped by the amine functionalized graphene
sheets and acts like a shield to prohibit the incident light adsorption by photocatalyst which
leads to reducing the generation rate of photoinduced electron-hole pairs 4, 5. All of these are
not favorable for CO2 photoreduction which also will show in photoreactor test, Fig. S9, the
CO2 photoreduction decreased with increasing the amount of the NH2-rGO in the structure.
8
Fig. S3. FTIR spectra of GO, NH2-rGO, NH2-rGO (5 wt %) / Al-PMOF and TCPP.
The FTIR spectra of pristine GO and NH2-rGO were shown in Fig. S3. In the spectrum
of GO, the absorption peaks at 1034, 1366 cm-1 are assigned to stretching vibrations of epoxy
C–O, C–OH bonds, also, 1720 and 1629 cm-1 can be ascribed to C=O in carboxylic acid and
carbonyl moieties. The broad absorption peak at 3000–3500 cm-1 is related to the O–H
stretching vibrations of hydroxyl groups on GO surface and adsorbed water molecules 6-9.
After amine functionalization, these peaks almost disappeared while new peaks arise at 1637,
1127–1529 and 3405 cm-1 that can be ascribed to the antisymmetric C–N stretching
vibrations coupled with out-of-plane NH2 and NH modes, also the N–H stretching vibrations
6, 10. Generally, the above results clearly demonstrate the successful linkage of nitrogen to
rGO. The FTIR spectrum of TCPP (Fig. S3) shows typical symmetric and asymmetric
400100016002200280034004000
Tra
nsm
itan
ce
Wavenumber (cm-1)
TCPP
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
NH2-rGO
GO
9
stretching bands of the pyrrole ring of ν (C–H), (C=C) and (C=N) of TCPP ligand in the
range 679-1700 cm-1. The N–H vibration of the pyrrole ring is seen at 3390 cm-1. The C=O
stretching vibration of carboxylate group in TCPP is observed at 1692 cm-1 11-14. The FTIR
spectrum of NH2-rGO (5 wt %)/ Al-PMOF (Fig. S3) more resembles that of TCPP. The
vibration band at 1652 cm-1 is assigned to the C=O stretch of carboxylate group. Also, the C-
N and C=N stretching vibration in NH2-rGO (5 wt %)/ Al-PMOF are observed at 1638 and
1580 cm-1.
10
Fig. S4. (a) Tauc plot of Al-PMOF (b) Mott-Schottky plots for Al-PMOF in 0.2 M Na2SO4
aqueous solution (pH=7). Inset: Energy diagram of the HOMO and LUMO levels of Al-PMOF.
Mott–Schottky plots of Al-PMOF were measured at frequencies of 500, 1000 and 1500 Hz
(Fig. S4(b)). According to the positive slope of the obtained C-2 values (vs the applied
potentials), suggesting that the Al-PMOF is n-type semiconductor. The intersection point is
independent of the frequency, and the flat band position determined from the intersection is ~
-1.12 V vs Ag/AgCl (i.e., -0.92 V vs NHE). Forasmuch as it is generally accepted that the
1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,9 2,0 2,1 2,2 2,3
(αhʋ)2
(eV
)2
Eg (eV)
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
-1,5 -1,3 -1,1 -0,9 -0,7 -0,5 -0,3 -0,1 0,1 0,3 0,5 0,7 0,9
10
10C
-2(F
-2)
Potential (V) vs. Ag/AgCl
500 Hz
1000 Hz
1500 Hz
LUMO
HOMO
-0.92 V
-1.12 V
0.97 V
(a)
(b)
1.89 eV
11
bottom of the conduction band (LUMO) in the n-type semiconductors is almost equal to the
flat-band potential, the LUMO of Al-PMOF is -0.92 V vs NHE. With the bandgap energy of
Al-PMOF estimated to be 1.89 ev, from Tauc plot (Fig. S4 (a)), its valence band (HOMO) is
0.97 V vs NHE, (Fig. S4 (b)).
12
Fig. S5. Tauc plot of NH2-rGO(5 wt%)/ Al-PMOF
1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,9 2,0 2,1 2,2 2,3
(αhʋ)2
(eV
)2
Eg (eV)
NH2-rGO (5 wt%)/Al-PMOF
13
Fig. S6. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy curves for the elements of (a,b) C1s (c,d) N1s and (e)
Al2p in two samples of NH2-rGO and NH2-rGO (5 wt%)/Al-PMOF.
The scanned C 1s spectrum of NH2-rGO in Fig. S6 (a) can be deconvoluted into five peaks
of C–C / C=C (284.35 eV, sp2–hydridized carbon), C=O (287.04 eV), C–O (286.65 eV), O–
C=O (289.71 eV) and C–N (285.6) 15, 16. Notably, from NH2-rGO and NH2-rGO (5 wt %)/
395 397 399 401 403 405
(c) NH2-rGO
N1s
C=N 398.01
C-N 399.39
396 397 398 399 400 401 402
Binding Energy (eV)
N-Al porphyrin 397.48
C-N 399.57
N-Al bridging
400.5
C=N 398.32
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
N1s (d)
70 71 72 73 74 75 76
Binding Energy (eV)
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
Al 2p (e)
bridging Al 72.14
porphyrinic Al 72.69
280 282 284 286 288 290 292 294 296
C-C
284.35
C-O
286.65
C-N
285.6
C=O
287.04
(a)
O-C=O
289.71
NH2-rGO
C1s
282 284 286 288 290
C-C
284.5
C-N
285.72
C=O
287.89
O-C=O
289.52
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
C1s
C-O
286.08
(b)
14
Al-PMOF (Fig. S6 (a) and (b)), the intensity of sp2-hydridized carbon increases while those
of functional groups corresponding to the oxygenous part shows the opposite trends,
revealing partial restoration of the graphene structure and the effective amine
functionalization of the rGO 17, 18. This observation is consistent with the above FTIR results.
As shown in Fig. S6 (a) and (b), the presence of amine groups in the NH2-rGO and NH2-rGO
(5 % wt)/ Al-PMOF is confirmed by the peak at 285.6 and 285.72 eV for the C–N bond in the
primary amine 10, 17. The N 1s spectrum of NH2-rGO in Fig. 4 (c) can be fitted in two peaks
of pyridinic (398.01 eV) and primary amine (399.39 eV) 1, 19, 20. According to the obtained
peaks, it can be concluded that NH groups are functionalized on the structure of GO. It could
not be doped GO. In the doped cased, N will replace C atoms in GO. In current study case,
just functional groups (-OH, and -COOH or C-O-, etc.) on the surface react with NH3 to
produce C-N and C=N. Therefore, just two different species of N were obtained, which are
C-N and C=N. As shown in Fig. 4 (d), two new peaks emerged which are related to the Al
porphyrin (397.48 eV) and Al bridging (400.5 eV). The peak is assignable to the Al inside the
porphyrin core that connected to four electronegative nitrogen atoms from pyrrole groups
(397.48 eV) and the Al connected to the two electronegative oxygen groups of two adjacent
porphyrin sites (400.5 eV), respectively.
15
Fig. S7. Solid photoluminescence spectra of TCPP (black plot), Al-PMOF (blue plot) and NH2-
rGO (5 wt%)/ Al-PMOF (green plot) (excitation wavelength: 420 nm).
The PL properties of TCPP, Al-PMOF and NH2-rGO(5 wt%)/Al-PMOF were investigated in the
solid state at room temperature with an excitation wavelength 420 nm. The emission peaks of
photocatalysts are illustrated in Fig. S7. The emission intensity of Al-PMOF was diminished
obviously, indicating that lifetime of photogenerated charge carriers in Al-PMOF is longer than
TCPP. In other words, it implies that the photogenerated charge carriers can be separated efficiently
due to the electron transfer from excited TCPP to the conduction band of metal 12, 21, 22. When NH2-
rGO was added to Al-PMOF structure the emission intensity was quenched dramatically. Due to the
some graphene properties, e.g. Fermi level (0 V vs NHE), graphene is a good electron acceptor during
photocatalytic reaction. In other words, under light irradiation, the photoinduced electrons on
photocatalyst can be transferred to the graphene rapidly for reduction process, while photoinduced
holes can be remained on photocatalyst 4, 23. Overall, these results imply a high spatial separation of
the photoinduced electron-hole pairs on graphene-based photocatalysts which is favor for CO2
photoreduction. Also, this behavior can be validated by photoreactor tests (Fig. 3 (a)).
600 650 700 750 800
Inte
nsi
ty (
a.u
.)
Wavelength (nm)
TCPP
Al-PMOF
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
16
Fig. S8. Nitrogen adsorption-desorption isotherms at 77 K for Al-PMOF and NH2-rGO(5 wt
%)/Al-PMOF.
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
V0
(m3
g-1
)
(P/Po)
NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF
Al-PMOF
17
Fig S9. Comparison of yield of HCOO- produced by different weight percentages of NH2-rGO
(5, 15, 25 wt %)/ Al-PMOF. Photocatalyst: 50 mg, MeCN/TEOA (5:1), solution volume: 60 mL
According to the results, it is apparent that increasing graphene has a negative effect on
photocatalytic activity. It may be explained by the fact that the high amount of graphene can
shield the photocatalyst and prevent the incident light adsorption by photocatalyst. In other
words, the generation rate of photoinduced electron-hole pairs will be reduced 4. Notably,
according to XRD and SEM results, the structures of NH2-rGO (15 wt%)/Al-PMOF and
NH2-rGO (25 wt%)/Al-PMOF are almost same, and also their photoactivities are nearly
similar.
685,6
479,8 476,4
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
5 wt% 15 wt% 25 wt%
nH
CO
O-/μ
mo
l g
cat-1
h -1
Weight percentage of NH2-rGO
18
Fig S10. Proposed mechanism of CO2 photoreduction over NH2-rGO/Al-PMOF.
TEOA
e-
e-
19
Table S1. Comparison of photocatalytic CO2 conversion performance.
Photocatalyst Sacrificial agent
Products HCOO ̶
(µmol/h. gcat.)
Ref.
NH2-rGO (5 wt%)/Al-PMOF
TEOA 685.6
This work
NH2-rGO (15 wt%)/Al-PMOF 479.8
NH2-rGO (25 wt%)/Al-PMOF 476.4
Al-PMOF 165.3
PCN-222 (Zr) TEOA 125 24
NH2-MIL-101 (Fe)
TEOA
445
25
MIL-101 (Fe) 147.5
NH2-MIL-53 (Fe) 116.25
MIL-53 (Fe) 74.25
NH2-MIL-83 (Fe) 75
MIL-83 (Fe) 22.5
UiO-66 (Zr) TEOA
0 26
NH2-UiO-66 (Zr) 26.4
MIL-125 (Ti) TEOA
0 27
NH2-MIL-125 (Ti) 16.28
MOF-525-Co TEOA CO: 200.6
28
CH4: 36.67
UiO-66/CNNS TEOA CO: 9.79 29
TiO2 0.1 M aqueous
NaOH
0
30 0.6 wt% ZnPc/TiO2 31.01
CdS (20 mg) TEOA
CO: 28.53 µmol.h-1 31
cocatalyst: Co-ZIF-9 (1 mg) H2: 12.93 µmol.h-1
Zn2GeO4/ZIF-8 0.1 M aqueous
Na2SO3
CH3OH: 0.22 32
1 wt% Pt-loaded Zn2GeO4/ZIF-8 CH3OH: 0.25
20
Supplementary References
1. L. Lai, L. Chen, D. Zhan, L. Sun, J. Liu, S. H. Lim, C. K. Poh, Z. Shen and J. Lin, Carbon,
2011, 49, 3250-3257.
2. Y. Liu, Y. Yang, Q. Sun, Z. Wang, B. Huang, Y. Dai, X. Qin and X. Zhang, ACS Appl.
Mater. Inter., 2013, 5, 7654-7658.
3. A. Fateeva, P. A. Chater, C. P. Ireland, A. A. Tahir, Y. Z. Khimyak, P. V. Wiper, J. R.
Darwent and M. J. Rosseinsky, Angew. Chem. Int. Edit., 2012, 51, 7440-7444.
4. J. Low, J. Yu and W. Ho, J. phys. chem. lett., 2015, 6, 4244-4251.
5. J. Ma, C. Zhou, J. Long, Z. Ding, R. Yuan and C. Xu, RSC Adv., 2018, 8, 14056-14063.
6. Y. D. Zhiyu Wang, Hongjiang Li, Zongbin Zhao, Hao Bin Wu, Ce Hao, Shaohong Liu,
Jieshan Qiu & Xiong Wen (David) Lou, nat. comm., 2014, 5002.
7. M. Jahan, Q. Bao and K. P. Loh, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2012, 134, 6707-6713.
8. R. Chen, T. Zhao, J. Lu, F. Wu, L. Li, J. Chen, G. Tan, Y. Ye and K. Amine, Nano Lett.,
2013, 13, 4642-4649.
9. Y. Si and E. T. Samulski, Nano Lett., 2008, 8, 1679-1682.
10. T. Ramanathan, F. T. Fisher, R. S. Ruoff and L. C. Brinson, Chem. Mater., 2005, 17, 1290-
1295.
11. R. Rahimi, Honarvar Fard, E., Saadati, S. et al., J Sol-Gel Sci Technol, 2012, 62, 351-357.
12. R. Rahimi, S. Shariatinia, S. Zargari, M. Yaghoubi Berijani, A. Ghaffarinejad and Z. S.
Shojaie, RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 46624-46631.
13. Y.-J. Yuan, J.-R. Tu, Z.-J. Ye, H.-W. Lu, Z.-G. Ji, B. Hu, Y.-H. Li, D.-P. Cao, Z.-T. Yu and
Z.-G. Zou, Dyes Pigments, 2015, 123, 285-292.
14. Y. Yuan, H. Lu, Z. Ji, J. Zhong, M. Ding, D. Chen, Y. Li, W. Tu, D. Cao, Z. Yu and Z. Zou,
Chem. Eng. J., 2015, 275, 8-16.
15. H. Hu, Z. Zhao, W. Wan, Y. Gogotsi and J. Qiu, Adv. Mater., 2013, 25, 2219-2223.
16. G. Zhou, L.-C. Yin, D.-W. Wang, L. Li, S. Pei, I. R. Gentle, F. Li and H.-M. Cheng, ACS
Nano, 2013, 7, 5367-5375.
17. Z. Wang, Y. Dong, H. Li, Z. Zhao, H. Bin Wu, C. Hao, S. Liu, J. Qiu and X. W. Lou, nat.
comm., 2014, 5, 5002.
18. Y. Jiang, M. Wei, J. Feng, Y. Ma and S. Xiong, Energ. Environ. Sci., 2016, 9, 1430-1438.
19. D. Hulicova-Jurcakova, M. Kodama, S. Shiraishi, H. Hatori, Z. H. Zhu and G. Q. Lu, Adv.
Funct. Mater., 2009, 19, 1800-1809.
20. A. Gromov, S. Dittmer, J. Svensson, O. A. Nerushev, S. A. Perez-Garcia, L. Licea-Jimenez,
R. Rychwalski and E. E. B. Campbell, J. Mater. Chem., 2005, 15, 3334-3339.
21. E. Bae and W. Choi, J.Phys. Chem. B, 2006, 110, 14792-14799.
22. N. Sadeghi, S. Sharifnia and M. Sheikh Arabi, J. CO2 Util., 2016, 16, 450-457.
23. D. Chen, H. Zhang, Y. Liu and J. Li, Energ. Environ. Sci., 2013, 6, 1362-1387.
24. H.-Q. Xu, J. Hu, D. Wang, Z. Li, Q. Zhang, Y. Luo, S.-H. Yu and H.-L. Jiang, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2015, 137, 13440-13443.
25. D. Wang, R. Huang, W. Liu, D. Sun and Z. Li, ACS Catal., 2014, 4, 4254-4260.
26. D. Sun, Y. Fu, W. Liu, L. Ye, D. Wang, L. Yang, X. Fu and Z. Li, Chem. Eur. J., 2013, 19,
14279-14285.
27. Y. Fu, D. Sun, Y. Chen, R. Huang, Z. Ding, X. Fu and Z. Li, Angew. Chem. Int. Edit., 2012,
51, 3364-3367.
28. H. Zhang, J. Wei, J. Dong, G. Liu, L. Shi, P. An, G. Zhao, J. Kong, X. Wang and X. Meng,
Angew. Chem., 2016, 128, 14522-14526.
29. L. Shi, T. Wang, H. Zhang, K. Chang and J. Ye, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2015, 25, 5360-5367.
30. Q. Wang, W. Wu, J. Chen, G. Chu, K. Ma and H. Zou, Colloids. Surf. A Physicochem. Eng.
Asp., 2012, 409, 118-125.
31. S. Wang and X. Wang, Appl. Catal. B, 2015, 162, 494-500.
32. Q. Liu, Z.-X. Low, L. Li, A. Razmjou, K. Wang, J. Yao and H. Wang, J J. Mater. Chem. A,
2013, 1, 11563-11569.