Photoelectrode for water splitting: Materials, fabrication and characterization

  • Zhiliang Wang (王志亮)
  • Lianzhou Wang (王连州)
Reviews SPECIAL ISSUE: Advanced Materials for Photoelectrochemical Cells
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

Photoelectorchemical (PEC) water splitting is an attractive approach for producing sustainable and environment- friendly hydrogen. An efficient PEC process is rooted in appropriate semiconductor materials, which should possess small bandgap to ensure wide light harvest, facile charge separation to allow the generated photocharges migrating to the reactive sites and highly catalytic capability to fully utilize the separated photocharges. Proper electrode fabrication method is of equal importance for promoting charge transfer and accelerating surface reactions in the electrodes. Moreover, powerful characterization method can shed light on the complex PEC process and provide deep understanding of the rate-determining step for us to improve the PEC systems further. Targeting on high solar conversion efficiency, here we provide a review on the development of PEC water splitting in the aspect of materials exploring, fabrication method and characterization. It is expected to provide some fundamental insight of PEC and inspire the design of more effective PEC systems.

Keywords

photoelectrode water splitting semiconductor material electrode fabrication characterization 

光电催化分解水: 电极材料, 电极组装和电极表征

摘要

光电催化分解水作为一种清洁可持续获取氢能的技术吸引了人们的广泛关注. 高效光电过程有赖于选择合适的半导体材料, 即: 具 有较小的带隙以保障足够的光吸收; 优异的电荷分离以保障光生电荷向反应位点的迁移; 高效的表面催化能力以实现对光生电荷的充分 利用. 同时, 合理的电极组装方法对于电荷的迁移与表面反应也起到至关重要的作用. 进一步, 强有力的表征技术为深入了解光电催化分 解水的过程, 认清反应限速步骤并据此进一步优化电极设计提供了保证和依据. 本文着眼于实现高效的光催化分解水制氢过程, 综述了电 极材料的开发, 电极组装手段和光电催化表征技术这三个方面的研究进展, 并期望为发展更加高效的光电催化分解水过程提供指导.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the Australian Research Council through its Discovery Project (DP) and Federation Fel-lowship (FF) Program. The Queensland node of the Australian National Fabrication Facility (ANFF) is also appreciated.

References

  1. 1.
    Perez M, Perez R. Update 2015–A Fundamental Look at Supply Side Energy Reserves for the Planet. IEA-SHCP-Newsletter, 2015Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abas N, Kalair A, Khan N. Review of fossil fuels and future energy technologies. Futures, 2015, 69: 31–49Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walter MG, Warren EL, McKone JR, et al. Solar water splitting cells. Chem Rev, 2010, 110: 6446–6473Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McKone JR, Lewis NS, Gray HB. Will solar-driven water-splitting devices see the light of day? Chem Mater, 2014, 26: 407–414Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li J, Wu N. Semiconductor-based photocatalysts and photoelectrochemical cells for solar fuel generation: a review. Catal Sci Technol, 2015, 5: 1360–1384Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fujishima A, Honda K. Electrochemical photolysis of water at a semiconductor electrode. Nature, 1972, 238: 37–38Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilson RH. Electron transfer processes at the semiconductorelectrolyte interface. Critical Rev Solid State Mater Sci, 1980, 10: 1–41Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gerischer H. The principles of photoelectrochemical energy conversion. In Photovoltaic and Photoelectrochemical Solar Energy Conversion. New York and London: Plenum Press, 1981, 199–261Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gerischer H. The impact of semiconductors on the concepts of electrochemistry. Electrochim Acta, 1990, 35: 1677–1699Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grätzel M. Photoelectrochemical cells. Nature, 2001, 414: 338–344Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bella F, Gerbaldi C, Barolo C, et al. Aqueous dye-sensitized solar cells. Chem Soc Rev, 2015, 44: 3431–3473Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen Z, Jaramillo TF, Deutsch TG, et al. Accelerating materials development for photoelectrochemical hydrogen production: Standards for methods, definitions, and reporting protocols. J Mater Res, 2010, 25: 3–16Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bonke SA, Wiechen M, MacFarlane DR, et al. Renewable fuels from concentrated solar power: towards practical artificial photosynthesis. Energy Environ Sci, 2015, 8: 2791–2796Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chu S, Li W, Yan Y, et al. Roadmap on solar water splitting: current status and future prospects. Nano Futures, 2017, 1: 022001Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sivula K, Takata T, van de Krol R. Semiconducting materials for photoelectrochemical energy conversion. Nat Rev Mater, 2016, 1: 15010Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen S, Takata T, Domen K. Particulate photocatalysts for overall water splitting. Nat Rev Mater, 2017, 2: 17050Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li X, Wen J, Low J, et al. Design and fabrication of semiconductor photocatalyst for photocatalytic reduction of CO2 to solar fuel. Sci China Mater, 2014, 57: 70–100Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang Z, Qi Y, Ding C, et al. Insight into the charge transfer in particulate Ta3N5 photoanode with high photoelectrochemical performance. Chem Sci, 2016, 7: 4391–4399Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang Z, Yates Jr. JT. Band bending in semiconductors: chemical and physical consequences at surfaces and interfaces. Chem Rev, 2012, 112: 5520–5551Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang L, Sasaki T. Titanium oxide nanosheets: graphene analogues with versatile functionalities. Chem Rev, 2014, 114: 9455–9486Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen H, Wang Q, Lyu M, et al. Wavelength-switchable photocurrent in a hybrid TiO2–Ag nanocluster photoelectrode. Chem Commun, 2015, 51: 12072–12075Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dotan H, Sivula K, Grätzel M, et al. Probing the photoelectrochemical properties of hematite (α-Fe2O3) electrodes using hydrogen peroxide as a hole scavenger. Energy Environ Sci, 2011, 4: 958–964Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang Z, Liu G, Ding C, et al. Synergetic effect of conjugated Ni(OH)2/IrO2 cocatalyst on titanium-doped hematite photoanode for solar water splitting. J Phys Chem C, 2015, 119: 19607–19612Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Soedergren S, Hagfeldt A, Olsson J, et al. Theoretical models for the action spectrum and the current-voltage characteristics of microporous semiconductor films in photoelectrochemical cells. J Phys Chem, 1994, 98: 5552–5556Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shinagawa T, Cao Z, Cavallo L, et al. Photophysics and electrochemistry relevant to photocatalytic water splitting involved at solid–electrolyte interfaces. J Energy Chem, 2017, 26: 259–269Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Salje E, Viswanathan K. Physical properties and phase transitions in WO3. Acta Cryst A, 1975, 31: 356–359Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Deb SK. Opportunities and challenges in science and technology of WO3 for electrochromic and related applications. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells, 2008, 92: 245–258Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang S, Chen H, Gao G, et al. Synergistic crystal facet engineering and structural control of WO3 films exhibiting unprecedented photoelectrochemical performance. Nano Energy, 2016, 24: 94–102Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weber MF. Efficiency of splitting water with semiconducting photoelectrodes. J Electrochem Soc, 1984, 131: 1258–1265Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cardon F, Gomes WP. On the determination of the flat-band potential of a semiconductor in contact with a metal or an electrolyte from the Mott-Schottky plot. J Phys D-Appl Phys, 1978, 11: L63–L67Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wolcott A, Smith WA, Kuykendall TR, et al. Photoelectrochemical study of nanostructured ZnO thin films for hydrogen generation from water splitting. Adv Funct Mater, 2009, 19: 1849–1856Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang H, Lindgren T, He J, et al. Photolelectrochemistry of nanostructured WO3 thin film electrodes for water oxidation: mechanism of electron transport. J Phys Chem B, 2000, 104: 5686–5696Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Maruska HP, Ghosh AK. A study of oxide-based heterostructure photoelectrodes. Sol Energy Mater, 1979, 1: 411–429Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kudo A, Omori K, Kato H. A novel aqueous process for preparation of crystal form-controlled and highly crystalline BiVO4 powder from layered vanadates at room temperature and its photocatalytic and photophysical properties. J Am Chem Soc, 1999, 121: 11459–11467Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang S, Chen P, Yun JH, et al. An electrochemically treated BiVO4 photoanode for efficient photoelectrochemical water splitting. Angew Chem, 2017, 129: 8620–8624Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kuang Y, Jia Q, Ma G, et al. Ultrastable low-bias water splitting photoanodes via photocorrosion inhibition and in situ catalyst regeneration. Nat Energy, 2017, 2: 16191Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sivula K, Le Formal F, Grätzel M. Solar water splitting: progress using hematite (α-Fe2O3) photoelectrodes. ChemSusChem, 2011, 4: 432–449Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bora DK, Braun A, Constable EC. “In rust we trust”. Hematite–the prospective inorganic backbone for artificial photosynthesis. Energy Environ Sci, 2013, 6: 407–425Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tilley S, Cornuz M, Sivula K, et al. Light-induced water splitting with hematite: improved nanostructure and iridium oxide cata-lysis. Angew Chem, 2010, 122: 6549–6552Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Warren SC, Voïtchovsky K, Dotan H, et al. Identifying champion nanostructures for solar water-splitting. Nat Mater, 2013, 12: 842–849Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Peerakiatkhajohn P, Yun JH, Chen H, et al. Stable hematite nanosheet photoanodes for enhanced photoelectrochemical water splitting. Adv Mater, 2016, 28: 6405–6410Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chen S, Wang LW. Thermodynamic oxidation and reduction potentials of photocatalytic semiconductors in aqueous solution. Chem Mater, 2012, 24: 3659–3666Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Paracchino A, Laporte V, Sivula K, et al. Highly active oxide photocathode for photoelectrochemical water reduction. Nat Mater, 2011, 10: 456–461Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gu J, Yan Y, Krizan JW, et al. p-type CuRhO2 as a self-healing photoelectrode for water reduction under visible light. J Am Chem Soc, 2014, 136: 830–833Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hahn NT, Holmberg VC, Korgel BA, et al. Electrochemical synthesis and characterization of p-CuBi2O4 thin film photocathodes. J Phys Chem C, 2012, 116: 6459–6466Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Berglund SP, Abdi FF, Bogdanoff P, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of CuBi2O4 as a photocathode material for photoelectrochemical water splitting. Chem Mater, 2016, 28: 4231–4242Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zhang P, Zhang J, Gong J. Tantalum-based semiconductors for solar water splitting. Chem Soc Rev, 2014, 43: 4395–4422Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sun Y, Sun Z, Gao S, et al. All-surface-atomic-metal chalcogenide sheets for high-efficiency visible-light photoelectrochemical water splitting. Adv Energy Mater, 2014, 4: 1300611Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chun WJ, Ishikawa A, Fujisawa H, et al. Conduction and valence band positions of Ta2O5, TaON, and Ta3N5 by UPS and electrochemical methods. J Phys Chem B, 2003, 107: 1798–1803Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Liu G, Ye S, Yan P, et al. Enabling an integrated tantalum nitride photoanode to approach the theoretical photocurrent limit for solar water splitting. Energy Environ Sci, 2016, 9: 1327–1334Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mukherji A, Marschall R, Tanksale A, et al. N-doped CsTaWO6 as a new photocatalyst for hydrogen production from water splitting under solar irradiation. Adv Funct Mater, 2011, 21: 126–132Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Higashi M, Domen K, Abe R. Fabrication of an efficient BaTaO2N photoanode harvesting a wide range of visible light for water splitting. J Am Chem Soc, 2013, 135: 10238–10241Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wang Z, Han J, Li Z, et al. Moisture-assisted preparation of compact GaN:ZnO photoanode toward efficient photoelectrochemical water oxidation. Adv Energy Mater, 2016, 6: 1600864Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wang Z, Zong X, Gao Y, et al. Promoting charge separation and injection by optimizing the interfaces of GaN:ZnO photoanode for efficient solar water oxidation. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 2017, 9: 30696–30702Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yokoyama D, Minegishi T, Maeda K, et al. Photoelectrochemical water splitting using a Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film. Electrochem Commun, 2010, 12: 851–853Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Jiang F, Gunawan F, Harada T, et al. Pt/In2S3/CdS/Cu2ZnSnS4 thin film as an efficient and stable photocathode for water reduction under sunlight radiation. J Am Chem Soc, 2015, 137: 13691–13697Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lee YL, Chi CF, Liau SY. CdS/CdSe co-sensitized TiO2 photoelectrode for efficient hydrogen generation in a photoelectrochemical cell. Chem Mater, 2009, 22: 922–927Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Stranks SD, Eperon GE, Grancini G, et al. Electron-hole diffusion lengths exceeding 1 micrometer in an organometal trihalide perovskite absorber. Science, 2013, 342: 341–344Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Yang WS, Park BW, Jung EH, et al. Iodide management in formamidinium-lead-halide–based perovskite layers for efficient solar cells. Science, 2017, 356: 1376–1379Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yang WS, Noh JH, Jeon NJ, et al. High-performance photovoltaic perovskite layers fabricated through intramolecular exchange. Science, 2015, 348: 1234–1237Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Li X, Lu W, Dong W, et al. Si/PEDOT hybrid core/shell nanowire arrays as photoelectrodes for photoelectrochemical water-splitting. Nanoscale, 2013, 5: 5257–5261Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cui W, Wu S, Chen F, et al. Silicon/organic heterojunction for photoelectrochemical energy conversion photoanode with a record photovoltage. ACS Nano, 2016, 10: 9411–9419Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fumagalli F, Bellani S, Schreier M, et al. Hybrid organic–inorganic H2-evolving photocathodes: understanding the route towards high performance organic photoelectrochemical water splitting. J Mater Chem A, 2016, 4: 2178–2187Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Zhang D, Yoshida T, Minoura H. Low-temperature fabrication of efficient porous titania photoelectrodes by hydrothermal crystallization at the solid/gas interface. Adv Mater, 2003, 15: 814–817Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    de Jongh PE, Vanmaekelbergh D, Kelly JJ. Cu2O: electrodeposition and characterization. Chem Mater, 1999, 11: 3512–3517Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Siegfried MJ, Choi KS. Elucidating the effect of additives on the growth and stability of Cu2O surfaces via shape transformation of pre-grown crystals. J Am Chem Soc, 2006, 128: 10356–10357Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Kim TW, Choi KS. Nanoporous BiVO4 photoanodes with duallayer oxygen evolution catalysts for solar water splitting. Science, 2014, 343: 990–994Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhong M, Hisatomi T, Kuang Y, et al. Surface modification of CoOx loaded BiVO4 photoanodes with ultrathin p-type NiO layers for improved solar water oxidation. J Am Chem Soc, 2015, 137: 5053–5060Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Pan Q, Wang M, Wang Z. Facile fabrication of Cu2O/CuO nanocomposite films for lithium-ion batteries via chemical bath deposition. Electrochem Solid-State Lett, 2009, 12: A50Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Xia XH, Tu JP, Zhang J, et al. Electrochromic properties of porous NiO thin films prepared by a chemical bath deposition. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells, 2008, 92: 628–633Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Pathan HM, Lokhande CD. Deposition of metal chalcogenide thin films by successive ionic layer adsorption and reaction (SILAR) method. Bull Mater Sci, 2004, 27: 85–111Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Souza FL, Lopes KP, Nascente PAP, et al. Nanostructured hematite thin films produced by spin-coating deposition solution: Application in water splitting. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells, 2009, 93: 362–368Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Duret A, Grätzel M. Visible light-induced water oxidation on mesoscopic α-Fe2O3 films made by ultrasonic spray pyrolysis. J Phys Chem B, 2005, 109: 17184–17191Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ding IK, Melas-Kyriazi J, Cevey-Ha NL, et al. Deposition of holetransport materials in solid-state dye-sensitized solar cells by doctor-blading. Org Electron, 2010, 11: 1217–1222Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Minegishi T, Nishimura N, Kubota J, et al. Photoelectrochemical properties of LaTiO2N electrodes prepared by particle transfer for sunlight-driven water splitting. Chem Sci, 2013, 4: 1120–1124Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Chang PC, Fan Z, Wang D, et al. ZnO nanowires synthesized by vapor trapping CVD method. Chem Mater, 2004, 16: 5133–5137Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Chen H, Lyu M, Zhang M, et al. Switched photocurrent on tin sulfide-based nanoplate photoelectrodes. ChemSusChem, 2017, 10: 670–674Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Izu M, Ellison T. Roll-to-roll manufacturing of amorphous silicon alloy solar cells with in situ cell performance diagnostics. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells, 2003, 78: 613–626Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Wang X, Summers CJ, Wang ZL. Large-scale hexagonal-patterned growth of aligned ZnO nanorods for nano-optoelectronics and nanosensor arrays. Nano Lett, 2004, 4: 423–426Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Mahjouri-Samani M, Tian M, Puretzky AA, et al. Nonequilibrium synthesis of TiO2 nanoparticle “building blocks” for crystal growth by sequential attachment in pulsed laser deposition. Nano Lett, 2017, 17: 4624–4633Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Li A, Wang Z, Yin H, et al. Understanding the anatase–rutile phase junction in charge separation and transfer in a TiO2 electrode for photoelectrochemical water splitting. Chem Sci, 2016, 7: 6076–6082Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Vidyarthi VS, Hofmann M, Savan A, et al. Enhanced photoelectrochemical properties of WO3 thin films fabricated by reactive magnetron sputtering. Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2011, 36: 4724–4731Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Carcia PF, McLean RS, Reilly MH, et al. Transparent ZnO thinfilm transistor fabricated by RF magnetron sputtering. Appl Phys Lett, 2003, 82: 1117–1119Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Yokoyama D, Hashiguchi H, Maeda K, et al. Ta3N5 photoanodes for water splitting prepared by sputtering. Thin Solid Films, 2011, 519: 2087–2092Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Cao J, Kako T, Li P, et al. Fabrication of p-type CaFe2O4 nanofilms for photoelectrochemical hydrogen generation. Electrochem Commun, 2011, 13: 275–278Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Sangle AL, Singh S, Jian J, et al. Very high surface area mesoporous thin films of SrTiO3 grown by pulsed laser deposition and application to efficient photoelectrochemical water splitting. Nano Lett, 2016, 16: 7338–7345Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Cho IS, Logar M, Lee CH, et al. Rapid and controllable flame reduction of TiO2 nanowires for enhanced solar water-splitting. Nano Lett, 2013, 14: 24–31Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Feng Y, Cho IS, Rao PM, et al. Sol-flame synthesis: a general strategy to decorate nanowires with metal oxide/noble metal nanoparticles. Nano Lett, 2012, 13: 855–860Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Rao PM, Cai L, Liu C, et al. Simultaneously efficient light absorption and charge separation in WO3/BiVO4 core/shell nanowire photoanode for photoelectrochemical water oxidation. Nano Lett, 2014, 14: 1099–1105Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Rao PM, Zheng X. Rapid catalyst-free flame synthesis of dense, aligned α-Fe2O3 nanoflake and CuO nanoneedle arrays. Nano Lett, 2009, 9: 3001–3006Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Han J, Zong X, Wang Z, et al. A hematite photoanode with gradient structure shows an unprecedentedly low onset potential for photoelectrochemical water oxidation. Phys Chem Chem Phys, 2014, 16: 23544–23548Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Cai L, Rao PM, Zheng X. Morphology-controlled flame synthesis of single, branched, and flower-like α-MoO3 nanobelt arrays. Nano Lett, 2011, 11: 872–877Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    AlOtaibi B, Harati M, Fan S, et al. High efficiency photoelectrochemical water splitting and hydrogen generation using GaN nanowire photoelectrode. Nanotechnology, 2013, 24: 175401Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Sun Z, Liu Q, Yao T, et al. X-ray absorption fine structure spectroscopy in nanomaterials. Sci China Mater, 2015, 58: 313–341Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Braun A, Sivula K, Bora DK, et al. Direct observation of two electron holes in a hematite photoanode during photoelectrochemical water splitting. J Phys Chem C, 2012, 116: 16870–16875Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Kanan MW, Yano J, Surendranath Y, et al. Structure and valency of a cobalt−phosphate water oxidation catalyst determined by in situ X-ray spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc, 2010, 132: 13692–13701Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    González-Flores D, Sánchez I, Zaharieva I, et al. Heterogeneous water oxidation: surface activity versus amorphization activation in cobalt phosphate catalysts. Angew Chem Int Ed, 2015, 54: 2472–2476Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Barroso M, Pendlebury SR, Cowan AJ, et al. Charge carrier trapping, recombination and transfer in hematite (α-Fe2O3) water splitting photoanodes. Chem Sci, 2013, 4: 2724–2734Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    le Formal F, Pastor E, Tilley SD, et al. Rate law analysis of water oxidation on a hematite surface. J Am Chem Soc, 2015, 137: 6629–6637Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Chen S, Qi Y, Hisatomi T, et al. Efficient visible-light-driven Zscheme overall water splitting using a MgTa2O6−xNy /TaON heterostructure photocatalyst for H2 evolution. Angew Chem Int Ed, 2015, 54: 8498–8501Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Su W, Zhang J, Feng Z, et al. Surface phases of TiO2 nanoparticles studied by UV Raman spectroscopy and FT-IR spectroscopy. J Phys Chem C, 2008, 112: 7710–7716Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Fu G, Yan S, Yu T, et al. Oxygen related recombination defects in Ta3N5 water splitting photoanode. Appl Phys Lett, 2015, 107: 171902Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Khan S, Zapata MJM, Baptista DL, et al. Effect of oxygen content on the photoelectrochemical activity of crystallographically preferred oriented porous Ta3N5 nanotubes. J Phys Chem C, 2015, 119: 19906–19914Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Xing G, Mathews N, Sun S, et al. Long-range balanced electronand hole-transport lengths in organic-inorganic CH3NH3PbI3. Science, 2013, 342: 344–347Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Arora N, Dar MI, Hinderhofer A, et al. Perovskite solar cells with CuSCN hole extraction layers yield stabilized efficiencies greater than 20%. Science, 2017, 358: 768–771Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Klahr B, Gimenez S, Fabregat-Santiago F, et al. Photoelectrochemical and impedance spectroscopic investigation of water oxidation with “Co–Pi”-coated hematite electrodes. J Am Chem Soc, 2012, 134: 16693–16700Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Klahr B, Gimenez S, Fabregat-Santiago F, et al. Water oxidation at hematite photoelectrodes: the role of surface states. J Am Chem Soc, 2012, 134: 4294–4302Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Peter LM. Energetics and kinetics of light-driven oxygen evolution at semiconductor electrodes: the example of hematite. J Solid State Electrochem, 2013, 17: 315–326Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Deng Y, Ting LRL, Neo PHL, et al. Operando Raman spectroscopy of amorphous molybdenum sulfide (MoSx) during the electrochemical hydrogen evolution reaction: identification of sulfur atoms as catalytically active sites for H+ reduction. ACS Catal, 2016, 6: 7790–7798Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Velu S, Suzuki K, Vijayaraj M, et al. In situ XPS investigations of Cu1−xNixZnAl-mixed metal oxide catalysts used in the oxidative steam reforming of bio-ethanol. Appl Catal B-Environ, 2005, 55: 287–299Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Nellist MR, Laskowski FAL, Qiu J, et al. Potential-sensing electrochemical atomic force microscopy for in operando analysis of water-splitting catalysts and interfaces. Nat Energy, 2018, 3: 46–52Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Lin F, Boettcher SW. Adaptive semiconductor/electrocatalyst junctions in water-splitting photoanodes. Nat Mater, 2014, 13: 81–86Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhiliang Wang (王志亮)
    • 1
  • Lianzhou Wang (王连州)
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Chemical Engineering and Australian Institute for Bioengineering and NanotechnologyThe University of QueenslandSt LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations