Enhancement of the Visible-Light Photocatalytic Activity of In₂O₃–TiO₂ Nanofiber Heteroarchitectures

Abstract

One-dimensional In(2)O(3)-TiO(2) heteroarchitectures with high visible-light photocatalytic activity have been successfully obtained by a simple combination of electrospinning technique and solvothermal process. The as-obtained products were characterized by field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and UV-vis spectra. The results revealed that the secondary In(2)O(3) nanostructures were successfully grown on the primary TiO(2) nanofibers substrates. Compared with the pure TiO(2) nanofibers, the obtained In(2)O(3)-TiO(2) heteroarchitectures showed enhancement of the visible-light photocatalytic activity to degrade rhodamine B (RB) because of the formation of heteroarchitectures, which might improve the separation of photogenerated electrons and holes derived from the coupling effect of TiO(2) and In(2)O(3) heteroarchitectures. Moreover, the In(2)O(3)-TiO(2) heteroarchitectures could be easily recycled without the decrease in the photocatalytic activity because of their one-dimensional nanostructural property.

Visible-Light-Active TiO2-Based Hybrid Nanocatalysts for Environmental Applications

“…In this case, the ZnFe 2 O 4 sensitization enhances the probability of photoinduced charge separation and extends the range of the photoresponse of TiO 2 nanotube arrays from the UV to the visible region [41]. Figure 3) [34]. Recently, other architectures have been considered as well, including Cu2O deposited on TiO2 nanowires, Cu2O on TiO2 nanosheets, and Cu2O/TiO2 core-shell structures, all showing improved photocatalytic performance under visible light when compared to pure TiO2 [37].…”

“…On the other hand, in non-p-n heterojunctions, the two semiconductors (A and B) are tightly bound to build an efficient heterostructure in which the internal field is able to promote the separation and migration of photogenerated carriers. For such non-p-n heterojunction systems, like CdS/TiO2 [33], InO3/TiO2 [34], WO3/TiO2 [35], Fe2O3/TiO2 [36], and ZnO/TiO2 [24,25] the staggered band gap type structure is the most suitable for photocatalytic applications [27].…”

Preparation and Photocatalytic Performance of One-Dimensional In2O3 Nanofibers, CuO Microfibers and CuO/In2O3 Heterostructured Nanofibers by Electrospinning Process

“…[1][2][3] They can also degrade the organic pollutant aiming at environment protection. 4,5 Although many methods can be used to prepare semiconductors, the electrospinning process is considered as the superior one. It is unmatchable for other methods to synthesize semiconductor oxides nano¯bers, nanotubes and nanobelts on account of its particular principle.…”

“…It is unmatchable for other methods to synthesize semiconductor oxides nano¯bers, nanotubes and nanobelts on account of its particular principle. One-dimensional (1D) structure of the single simple oxides including TiO 2 , ZnO, CuO, SnO 2 , In 2 O 3 6-10 and single complex oxides such as MgWO 4 , 11 BiVO 4 12 and Bi 2 MO 6 (M¼Mo, W) 13 have been successfully obtained by combining electrospinning with the subsequent calcination process. However, it is di±cult to satisfy some harsh terms simultaneously on a single semiconductor photocatalyst, such as suitable bandgap for harvesting light, facile separation and transportation of charge carriers, as well as proper valence band (VB) and conduction band (CB) edge potential for redox reaction being thermodynamically feasible.…”

Enhancement of the visible light photocatalytic activity of heterojunction In2O3/BiVO4 composites

“…Accordingly, photogenerated charges can transport from one semiconductor to another. This favors the separation of photoinduced electrons and holes and thus enhances the photocatalytic activity of semiconductor heterostructure dramatically [15]. Considering the band gap of BiVO 4 (E g = 2.4 eV) is lower than that of In 2 O 3 (E g = 2.8 eV), but the valence band (VB) of In 2 O 3 (E VB = 2.17 eV vs. NHE) is lower than that of BiVO 4 (E VB = 2.75 eV vs. NHE).…”