Topics in Current Chemistry

, 377:27 | Cite as

Photocatalytic Approaches for Hydrogen Production via Formic Acid Decomposition

  • Miriam Navlani-García
  • David Salinas-Torres
  • Kohsuke MoriEmail author
  • Yasutaka Kuwahara
  • Hiromi YamashitaEmail author
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Heterogeneous Photocatalysis


The photocatalytic dehydrogenation of formic acid has recently emerged as an outstanding alternative to the traditional thermal catalysts widely applied in this reaction. The utilization of photocatalytic processes for the production of hydrogen is an appealing strategy that perfectly matches with the idea of a green and sustainable future energy scenario. However, it sounds easier than it is, and great efforts have been needed to design and develop highly efficient photocatalysts for the production of hydrogen from formic acid. In this work, some of the most representative strategies adopted for this application are reviewed, paying particular attention to systems based on TiO2, CdS and C3N4.


Hydrogen production Formic acid Photocatalyst Semiconductor Heterojunction 



The present work was supported by JST, PRESTO (JPMJPR1544) and by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (nos. 26220911, 25289289, and 26630409, 26620194) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) and MEXT and “Elemental Strategy Initiative to Form Core Research Center”. MNG gratefully acknowledge the financial support by the Generalitat Valenciana and Plan GenT (CDEIGENT/2018/027) for the financial support. DST thanks MICINN for a “Juan de la Cierva” contract (IJCI-2016-27636).


  1. 1.
    Kothandaraman J, Kar S, Sen R et al (2017) Efficient reversible hydrogen carrier system based on amine reforming of methanol. J Am Chem Soc 139:2549–2552PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Pires JCM (2019) Negative emissions technologies: a complementary solution for climate change mitigation. Sci Total Environ 672:502–514PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Markiewicz M, Zhang YQ, Bösmann A et al (2015) Environmental and health impact assessment of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier (LOHC) systems—challenges and preliminary results. Energy Environ Sci 8:1035–1045Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gahleitner G (2013) Hydrogen from renewable electricity: an international review of power-to-gas pilot plants for stationary applications. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:2039–2061Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kousksou T, Bruel P, Jamil A et al (2014) Energy storage: applications and challenges. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 120:59–80Google Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Aakko-Saksa PT, Cook C, Kiviaho J, Repo T (2018) Liquid organic hydrogen carriers for transportation and storing of renewable energy—review and discussion. J Power Sources 396:803–823Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dincer I, Acar C (2015) Review and evaluation of hydrogen production methods for better sustainability. Int J Hydrogen Energy 40:11094–11111Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Niermann M, Drünert S, Kaltschmitt M, Bonhoff K (2019) Liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHCs)—techno-economic analysis of LOHCs in a defined process chain. Energy Environ Sci 12:290–307Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rigas F, Sklavounos S (2005) Evaluation of hazards associated with hydrogen storage facilities. Int J Hydrogen Energy 30:1501–1510Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Edwards PP, Kuznetsov VL, David WIF, Brandon NP (2008) Hydrogen and fuel cells: towards a sustainable energy future. Energy Policy 36:4356–4362Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zheng J, Liu X, Xu P et al (2012) Development of high pressure gaseous hydrogen storage technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:1048–1057Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dadashzadeh M, Kashkarov S, Makarov D, Molkov V (2018) Risk assessment methodology for onboard hydrogen storage. Int J Hydrogen Energy 43:6462–6475Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lillo-Ródenas MA, Guo ZX, Aguey-Zinsou KF et al (2008) Effects of different carbon materials on MgH2 decomposition. Carbon 46:126–137Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shi J, Kuwahara Y, Wen M et al (2016) Room-temperature and aqueous-phase synthesis of plasmonic molybdenum oxide nanoparticles for visible-light-enhanced hydrogen generation. Chem Asian J 11:2377–2381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Salinas-Torres D, Navlani-García M, Kuwahara Y et al (2019) Non-noble metal doped perovskite as a promising catalyst for ammonia borane dehydrogenation. Catal Today. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    García-Aguilar J, Navlani-García M, Berenguer-Murcia Á et al (2016) Enhanced ammonia-borane decomposition by synergistic catalysis using CoPd nanoparticles supported on titano-silicates. RSC Adv 6:91768–91772Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Navlani-garcía M, Verma P, Kuwahara Y et al (2018) Visible-light-enhanced catalytic activity of Ru nanoparticles over carbon modified g-C3N4. J Photochem Photobiol A 358:327–333Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fuku K, Kamegawa T, Mori K, Yamashita H (2012) Highly dispersed platinum nanoparticles on TiO2 prepared by using the microwave-assisted deposition method: an efficient photocatalyst for the formation of H 2 and N 2 from aqueous NH 3. Chem Asian J 7:1366–1371PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lan R, Irvine JTS, Tao S (2012) Ammonia and related chemicals as potential indirect hydrogen storage materials. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:1482–1494Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Afif A, Radenahmad N, Cheok Q et al (2016) Ammonia-fed fuel cells: a comprehensive review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 60:822–835Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chowdhury AD, Agnihotri N, De A (2015) Hydrolysis of sodium borohydride using Ru-Co-PEDOT nanocomposites as catalyst. Chem Eng J 264:531–537Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dalebrook AF, Gan W, Grasemann M et al (2013) Hydrogen storage: beyond conventional methods. Chem Commun 49:8735–8751Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Preuster P, Papp C, Wasserscheid P (2017) Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers (LOHCs): toward a hydrogen-free hydrogen economy. Acc Chem Res 50:74–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Niermann M, Beckendorff A, Kaltschmitt M, Bonhoff K (2019) Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier (LOHC)—assessment based on chemical and economic properties. Int J Hydrogen Energy 44:6631–6654Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hu P, Fogler E, Diskin-Posner Y et al (2015) A novel liquid organic hydrogen carrier system based on catalytic peptide formation and hydrogenation. Nat Commun 6:6859PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mori K, Dojo M, Yamashita H (2013) Pd and Pd–Ag nanoparticles within a macroreticular basic resin: an efficient catalyst for hydrogen production from formic acid decomposition. ACS Catal 3:1114–1119Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Navlani-García M, Mori K, Kuwahara Y, Yamashita H (2018) Recent strategies targeting efficient hydrogen production from chemical hydrogen storage materials over carbon-supported catalysts. NPG Asia Mater 2018:1–16Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Navlani-García M, Mori K, Salinas-Torres D et al (2019) New approaches toward the hydrogen production from formic acid dehydrogenation over Pd-based heterogeneous catalysts. Front Mater 6:44Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    García-Aguilar J, Navlani-García M, Berenguer-Murcia Á et al (2016) Evolution of the PVP–Pd surface interaction in nanoparticles through the case study of formic acid decomposition. Langmuir 32:12110–12118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Podyacheva OY, Bulushev DA, Suboch AN et al (2018) Highly stable single-atom catalyst with ionic Pd active sites supported on N-doped carbon nanotubes for formic acid decomposition. Chemsuschem 11:3724–3727PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bulushev DA, Zacharska M, Shlyakhova EV et al (2016) Single isolated Pd2+ cations supported on N-doped carbon as active sites for hydrogen production from formic acid decomposition. ACS Catal 6:681–691Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bulushev DA, Bulusheva LG, Beloshapkin S et al (2015) Pd clusters supported on amorphous, low-porosity carbon spheres for hydrogen production from formic acid. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 7:8719–8726PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mellmann D, Sponholz P, Junge H, Beller M (2016) Formic acid as a hydrogen storage material-development of homogeneous catalysts for selective hydrogen release. Chem Soc Rev 45:3954–3988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Enthaler S, Von Langermann J, Schmidt T (2010) Carbon dioxide and formic acid—the couple for environmental-friendly hydrogen storage? Energy Environ Sci 3:1207–1217Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Coffey RS (1967) The decomposition of formic acid catalysed by soluble metal complexes. Chem Commun 1967:923–924Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fellay C, Dyson PJ, Laurenczy G (2008) A viable hydrogen-storage system based on selective formic acid decomposition with a ruthenium catalyst. Angew Chemie Int Ed 47:3966–3968Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Loges B, Boddien A, Junge H, Beller M (2008) Controlled generation of hydrogen from formic acid amine adducts at room temperature and application in H2/O2 fuel cells. Angew Chem Int Ed 47:3962–3965Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Iglesias M, Oro LA (2018) Mechanistic considerations on homogeneously catalyzed formic acid dehydrogenation. Eur J Inorg Chem 2018:2125–2138Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Navlani-García M, Mori K, Nozaki A et al (2016) Investigation of size sensitivity in the hydrogen production from formic acid over carbon-supported Pd nanoparticles. Chem Sel 1:1879–1886Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Navlani-García M, Mori K, Nozaki A et al (2016) Screening of carbon-supported PdAg nanoparticles in the hydrogen production from formic acid. Ind Eng Chem Res 55:7612–7620Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Navlani-García M, Salinas-Torres D, Mori K et al (2018) Enhanced formic acid dehydrogenation by the synergistic alloying effect of PdCo catalysts supported on graphitic carbon nitride. Int J Hydrogen Energy (in press) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sun J, Qiu H, Cao W et al (2019) Ultrafine Pd particles embedded in nitrogen-enriched mesoporous carbon for efficient H2 production from formic acid decomposition. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 7:1963–1972Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mori K, Sano T, Kobayashi H, Yamashita H (2018) Surface engineering of a supported PdAg catalyst for hydrogenation of CO2 to formic acid: elucidating the active Pd atoms in alloy nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 140:8902–8909PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Salinas-Torres D, Navlani-García M, Mori K et al (2019) Nitrogen-doped carbon materials as a promising platform toward the efficient catalysis for hydrogen generation. Appl Catal A Gen 571:25–41Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Navlani-García M, Martis M, Lozano-Castelló D et al (2015) Investigation of Pd nanoparticles supported on zeolites for hydrogen production from formic acid dehydrogenation. Catal Sci Technol 5:364–371Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Navlani-García M, Salinas-Torres D, Mori K et al (2019) Insights on palladium decorated nitrogen-doped carbon xerogels for the hydrogen production from formic acid. Catal Today 324:90–96Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wu Y, Wen M, Navlani-García M et al (2017) Palladium nanoparticles supported on titanium doped graphitic carbon nitride for formic acid dehydrogenation. Chem Asian J 12:860–867PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Navlani-García M, Miguel-García I, Berenguer-Murcia Á et al (2016) Pd/zeolite-based catalysts for the preferential CO oxidation reaction: ion-exchange, Si/Al and structure effect. Catal Sci Technol 6:2623–2632Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhang S, Li M, Zhao J et al (2019) Plasmonic AuPd-based Mott–Schottky photocatalyst for synergistically enhanced hydrogen evolution from formic acid and aldehyde. Appl Catal B Environ 252:24–32Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kim JH, Hansora D, Sharma P et al (2019) Toward practical solar hydrogen production—an artificial photosynthetic leaf-to-farm challenge. Chem Soc Rev 48:1908–1971PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Takata T, Domen K (2019) Particulate photocatalysts for water splitting: recent advances and future prospects. ACS Energy Lett 4:542–549Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Murdoch, Waterhouse, Nadeem et al (2010) Photocatalytic hydrogen production from ethanol over Au/TiO2 anatase and rutile nanoparticles: effect of Au particle size. ACS Natl Meet B Abstr 3:1Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Gallo A, Marelli M, Psaro R et al (2012) Bimetallic Au–Pt/TiO2 photocatalysts active under UV-A and simulated sunlight for H2 production from ethanol. Green Chem 14:330–333Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Wu N-L, Lee M-S (2004) Enhanced TiO2 photocatalysis by Cu in hydrogen production from aqueous methanol solution. Int J Hydrogen Energy 29:1601–1605Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jing D, Guo L (2007) Hydrogen production over Fe-doped tantalum oxide from an aqueous methanol solution under the light irradiation. J Phys Chem Solids 68:2363–2369Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Montini T, Monai M, Beltram A et al (2016) H2 production by photocatalytic reforming of oxygenated compounds using TiO2-based materials. Mater Sci Semicond Process 42:122–130Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    de Oliveira Melo M, Silva LA (2011) Visible light-induced hydrogen production from glycerol aqueous solution on hybrid Pt–CdS–TiO2 photocatalysts. J Photochem Photobiol A Chem 226:36–41Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Jana MK, Gupta U, Rao CNR (2016) Hydrazine as a hydrogen carrier in the photocatalytic generation of H2 using CdS quantum dots. Dalt Trans 45:15137–15141Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yuzawa H, Mori T, Itoh H, Yoshida H (2012) Reaction mechanism of ammonia decomposition to nitrogen and hydrogen over metal loaded titanium oxide photocatalyst. J Phys Chem C 116:4126–4136Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Reli M, Ambrožová N, Šihor M et al (2015) Novel cerium doped titania catalysts for photocatalytic decomposition of ammonia. Appl Catal B Environ 178:108–116Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Liu P-H, Wen M, Tan C-S et al (2017) Surface plasmon resonance enhancement of production of H2 from ammonia borane solution with tunable Cu2 − xS nanowires decorated by Pd nanoparticles. Nano Energy 31:57–63Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Verma P, Yuan K, Kuwahara Y et al (2018) Enhancement of plasmonic activity by Pt/Ag bimetallic nanocatalyst supported on mesoporous silica in the hydrogen production from hydrogen storage material. Appl Catal B Environ 223:10–15Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ji Y, Luo Y (2016) Structure-dependent photocatalytic decomposition of formic acid on the anatase TiO2(101) surface and strategies to increase its reaction rate. J Power Sources 306:208–212Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Civiš S, Ferus M, Zukalová M et al (2012) Photochemistry and gas-phase FTIR spectroscopy of formic acid interaction with anatase Ti18O2 nanoparticles. J Phys Chem C 116:11200–11205Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Liu S, Yu J, Jaroniec M (2011) Anatase TiO2 with dominant high-energy 001 facets: synthesis, properties, and applications. Chem Mater 23:4085–4093Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Roy P, Berger S, Schmuki P (2011) TiO2 nanotubes: synthesis and applications. Angew Chem Int Ed 50:2904–2939Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Fujishima A, Honda K (1972) Electrochemical photolysis of water at a semiconductor electrode. Nature 238:37–38Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Fujishima A, Zhang X (2006) Titanium dioxide photocatalysis: present situation and future approaches. Comptes Rendus Chim 9:750–760Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kumaravel V, Mathew S, Bartlett J, Pillai SC (2019) Photocatalytic hydrogen production using metal doped TiO2: a review of recent advances. Appl Catal B Environ 244:1021–1064Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ma D, Liu A, Li S et al (2018) TiO2 photocatalysis for C–C bond formation. Catal Sci Technol 8:2030–2045Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Fernández-Catalá J, Cazorla-Amorós D, Berenguer-Murcia Á (2018) Facile encapsulation of P25 (TiO2) in spherical silica with hierarchical porosity with enhanced photocatalytic properties for gas-phase propene oxidation. Appl Catal A Gen 564:123–132Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Cano-Casanova L, Amorós-Pérez A, Ouzzine M et al (2018) One step hydrothermal synthesis of TiO2 with variable HCl concentration: detailed characterization and photocatalytic activity in propene oxidation. Appl Catal B Environ 220:645–653Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Amorós-Pérez A, Cano-Casanova L, Lillo-Ródenas MÁ, Román-Martínez MC (2017) Cu/TiO2 photocatalysts for the conversion of acetic acid into biogas and hydrogen. Catal Today 287:78–84Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Song R, Luo B, Liu M et al (2017) Synergetic coupling of photo and thermal energy for efficient hydrogen production by formic acid reforming. AIChE J 63:2916–2925Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Liu P, Cai Z, You Y et al (2018) Surface modification on Pd–TiO2 hybrid nanostructures towards highly efficient H2 production from catalytic formic acid decomposition. Chem A Eur J 24:18398–18402Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Tsuji M, Shimamoto D, Uto K et al (2016) Enhancement of catalytic activity of AgPd@Pd/TiO2 nanoparticles under UV and visible photoirradiation. J Mater Chem A 4:14649–14656Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Zhang Z, Cao S, Liao Y, Xue C (2015) Selective photocatalytic decomposition of formic acid over AuPd nanoparticle-decorated TiO2 nanofibers toward high-yield hydrogen production. Appl Catal B Environ 162:204–209Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Wu M, Zhang M, Lv T et al (2017) The effect of calcination atmosphere upon the photocatalytic performance of Au–La2O3/TiO2 for hydrogen production from formic acid. Appl Catal A Gen 547:96–104Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Clarizia L, Di Somma I, Marotta R, Minutolo P, Villamaina R, Andreozzi R (2016) Photocatalytic reforming of formic acid for hydrogen production in Aqueous solutions containing cupric ions and TiO2 suspended nanoparticles under UV-simulated solar radiation. Appl Catal A Gen 518:181–188Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Zhang Z, Liu K, Bao Y, Dong B (2017) Photo-assisted self-optimizing of charge-carriers transport channel in the recrystallized multi-heterojunction nanofibers for highly efficient photocatalytic H2 generation. Appl Catal B Environ 203:599–606Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Li Q, Li X, Wageh S et al (2015) CdS/graphene nanocomposite photocatalysts. Adv Energy Mater 5:1500010Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Tada H, Naya S-I, Fujishima M (2018) Water splitting by plasmonic photocatalysts with a gold nanoparticle/cadmium sulfide heteroepitaxial junction: a mini review. Electrochem Commun 97:22–26Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Willner I, Goren Z (1986) Photodecomposition of formic acid by cadmium sulphide semiconductor particles. J Chem Soc Chem Commun 1986:172–173Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Nedoluzhko AI, Shumilin IA, Nikandrov VV (1996) Coupled action of cadmium metal and hydrogenase in formate photodecomposition sensitized by CdS. J Phys Chem 100:17544–17550Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Yeh HM, Lo SL, Chen MJ, Chen HY (2014) Hydrogen production from formic acid solution by modified TiO2 and titanate nanotubes in a two-step system under visible light irradiation. Water Sci Technol 69:1676–1681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Chen H-Y, Lo S-L, Lai Y-C, Liou Y-H (2018) Titanate nanotubes coupled with Pt nanoparticles for the inhibition of CdS photocorrosion during visible-light-driven hydrogen production from formic acid. Mater Res Express 5:9Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Wang X, Peng W-C, Li X-Y (2014) Photocatalytic hydrogen generation with simultaneous organic degradation by composite CdS–ZnS nanoparticles under visible light. Int J Hydrogen Energy 39:13454–13461Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Zeng M, Chai Z, Deng X et al (2016) Core–shell CdS@ZIF-8 structures for improved selectivity in photocatalytic H2 generation from formic acid. Nano Res 9:2729–2734Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Zhang YJ, Zhang L (2009) Preparation of Ru-loaded CdS/Al-HMS nanocomposites and production of hydrogen by photocatalytic degradation of formic acid. Appl Surf Sci 255:4863–4866Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Kuehnel MF, Wakerley DW, Orchard KL, Reisner E (2015) Photocatalytic formic acid conversion on CdS nanocrystals with controllable selectivity for H2 or CO. Angew Chem Int Ed 54:9627–9631Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Cao S, Chen Y, Wang H et al (2018) Ultrasmall CoP nanoparticles as efficient cocatalysts for photocatalytic formic acid dehydrogenation. Joule 2:549–557Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Nasir JA, Hafeez M, Arshad M et al (2018) Photocatalytic dehydrogenation of formic acid on CdS nanorods through Ni and Co redox mediation under mild conditions. Chemsuschem 11:2587–2592PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Dong F, Zhao Z, Xiong T et al (2013) In situ construction of g-C3N4/g-C3N4 metal-free heterojunction for enhanced visible-light photocatalysis. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 5:11392–11401PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Huang H, Yang S, Vajtai R et al (2014) Pt-decorated 3D architectures built from graphene and graphitic carbon nitride nanosheets as efficient methanol oxidation catalysts. Adv Mater 26:5160–5165PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Ong W-J, Tan L-L, Ng YH et al (2016) Graphitic carbon nitride (g-C3N4)-based photocatalysts for artificial photosynthesis and environmental remediation: are we a step closer to achieving sustainability? Chem Rev 116:7159–7329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Goettmann F, Fischer A, Antonietti M, Thomas A (2006) Metal-free catalysis of sustainable Friedel–Crafts reactions: direct activation of benzene by carbon nitrides to avoid the use of metal chlorides and halogenated compounds. Chem Commun 2006:4530–4532Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Wang X, Maeda K, Thomas A et al (2009) A metal-free polymeric photocatalyst for hydrogen production from water under visible light. Nat Mater 8:76–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Fu J, Yu J, Jiang C, Cheng B (2018) g-C3N4-based heterostructured photocatalysts. Adv Energy Mater 8:1701503Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Mamba G, Mishra AK (2016) Graphitic carbon nitride (g-C3N4) nanocomposites: a new and exciting generation of visible light driven photocatalysts for environmental pollution remediation. Appl Catal B Environ 198:347–377Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Fajrina N, Tahir M (2019) A critical review in strategies to improve photocatalytic water splitting towards hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 44:540–577Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Xiao L, Jun Y-S, Wu B et al (2017) Carbon nitride supported AgPd alloy nanocatalysts for dehydrogenation of formic acid under visible light. J Mater Chem A 5:6382–6387Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Photocatalyst NMS, Cai Y, Li X et al (2013) Highly efficient dehydrogenation of formic acid over a palladium. Angew Chem 125:1–5Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Liu H, Liu X, Yang W et al (2019) Photocatalytic dehydrogenation of formic acid promoted by a superior PdAg@g-C3N4 Mott–Schottky heterojunction. J Mater Chem A 7:2022Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Tsutsumi K, Kashimura N, Tabata K (2015) Photo-assisted hydrogen evolution in aqueous solution of formic acid with silicon which is supported with noble metals. Silicon 7:43–48Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Wu B, Lee J, Mubeen S et al (2016) Plasmon-mediated photocatalytic decomposition of formic acid on palladium. Nanostructures 4:1041–1046Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Kakuta S, Abe T (2009) A novel example of molecular hydrogen generation from formic acid at visible-light-responsive photocatalyst. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 1:2707–2710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Han L, Zhang L, Wu H et al (2019) Anchoring Pt single atoms on Te nanowires for plasmon-enhanced dehydrogenation of formic acid at room temperature. Adv Sci. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Liu P, Gu X, Zhang H et al (2017) Visible-light-driven catalytic activity enhancement of Pd in AuPd nanoparticles for hydrogen evolution from formic acid at room temperature. Appl Catal B Environ 204:497–504Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Wen M, Mori K, Kuwahara Y, Yamashita H (2017) Plasmonic Au@Pd nanoparticles supported on a basic metal-organic framework: synergic boosting of H2 production from formic acid. ACS Energy Lett 2:1–7Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Wei J, Wang H, Zhang Q, Li Y (2015) One-pot hydrothermal synthesis of N-doped carbon quantum dots using the waste of shrimp for hydrogen evolution from formic acid. Chem Lett 44:241–243Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Li Y, He F, Peng S et al (2011) Effects of electrolyte NaCl on photocatalytic hydrogen evolution in the presence of electron donors over Pt/TiO2. J Mol Catal A Chem 341:71–76Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Lanese V, Spasiano D, Marotta R et al (2013) Hydrogen production by photoreforming of formic acid in aqueous copper/TiO2 suspensions under UV-simulated solar radiation at room temperature. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:9644–9654Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Halasi G, Schubert G, Solymosi F (2012) Photolysis of HCOOH over Rh deposited on pure and N-modified TiO2: production of pure H2. Catal Lett 142:218–223Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Matsumura M, Hiramoto M, Iehara T, Tsubomura H (1984) Photocatalytic and photoelectrochemical reactions of aqueous solutions of formic acid, formaldehyde, and methanol on platinized CdS powder and at a CdS electrode. J Phys Chem 88:248–250Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Li Y, Hu Y, Peng S et al (2009) Synthesis of CdS nanorods by an ethylenediamine assisted hydrothermal method for photocatalytic hydrogen evolution. J Phys Chem C 113:9352–9358Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Li Y, Tang L, Peng S et al (2012) Phosphate-assisted hydrothermal synthesis of hexagonal CdS for efficient photocatalytic hydrogen evolution. Cryst Eng Comm 14:6974–6982Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Zhang YJ, Zhang L, Li S (2010) Synthesis of Al-substituted mesoporous silica coupled with CdS nanoparticles for photocatalytic generation of hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen Energy 35:438–444Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Materials and Manufacturing Science, Graduate School of EngineeringOsaka UniversitySuitaJapan
  2. 2.University Materials Institute of Alicante (IUMA)University of Alicante (UA)AlicanteSpain
  3. 3.Unit of Elements Strategy Initiative for Catalysts and Batteries (ESICB)Kyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations