BRIEF REPORTNo Access

Nanoarchitectonics of AgBr/4A Zeolite Composites with Enhanced Photocatalytic Properties Under Visible Light

Zelong Sun

College of Science and Technology, Agricultural University of Hebei, Huanghua 061100, P. R. China

E-mail Address: S18231939221@163.com

Search for more papers by this author

Dan Gao

School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Engineering, Cangzhou Jiaotong College, Huanghua 061100, P. R. China

E-mail Address: dang@bjtuhbxy.edu.cn

Search for more papers by this author

Ximan Yue

College of Science and Technology, Agricultural University of Hebei, Huanghua 061100, P. R. China

E-mail Address: 1471802149@qq.com

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Jiwen Li

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8215-1587

College of Science and Technology, Agricultural University of Hebei, Huanghua 061100, P. R. China

E-mail Address: lijiwen@hebau.edu.cn

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793292022500163Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

AgBr/zeolite photocatalysts with different mass ratios were synthesized by depositing AgBr on the surface of 4A zeolite via the one-step precipitation method. AgBr/zeolite with mass ratios of 1:1 exhibited the highest photocatalytic activity, resulting in the complete degradation of the methyl orange (MO) dye under visible-light irradiation for 30min. The photocatalysts were characterized by N₂ adsorption–desorption, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), UV–Vis diffused reflectance spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. The AgBr particles around 4A zeolite were smaller than pure AgBr. The specific surface area of 1:1 AgBr/zeolite was much larger than that of pure AgBr, which indicates that 1:1 AgBr/zeolite possessed more active sites. The photocatalytic stability of 1:1 AgBr/zeolite was investigated, and MO degradation rate of 90.4% was achieved after five cycling runs. The trapping experiments showed that hydroxyl radical ( $\cdot$ $\cdot$ OH), superoxide radical ( $\cdot O_{2}^{-}$ $\cdot O_{2}^{-}$ ), and hole (h⁺) were the reactive species responsible for removing MO, and h⁺ played a key role in MO removal. A possible reaction mechanism in AgBr/zeolite photocatalytic system for MO degradation was proposed.

Keywords:

References

1. A. Fujishima and K. Honda , Nature 238, 37 (1972). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. D. J. Martin, G. Liu, S. J. Moniz, Y. Bi, A. M. Beale, J. Ye and J. Tang , Chem. Soc. Rev. 44, 7808 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. Q. Xiang, J. Yu and M. Jaroniec , J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 6575 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. H. Tong, S. Ouyang, Y. Bi, N. Umezawa, M. Oshikiri and J. Ye , Adv. Mater. 24, 229 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. M. Stefan et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 570, 151172 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. L. Peng et al., Nano Select 2, 447 (2020). Google Scholar
7. Q. Yongteng et al., Adv. Mater. Interfaces 8, 627 (2020). Google Scholar
8. H. M. Zahid et al., J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 101, 49 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. W. S. Wang, H. Du, R. X. Wang, T. Wen and A. W. Xu , Nanoscale 5, 3315 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. Y. Qu and X. Duan , Chem. Soc. Rev. 42, 2568 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. H. Park, Y. Park, W. Kim and W. Choi , J. Photochem. Photobiol. C 15, 1 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. X. Cui, M. Ma, W. Zhang, Y. Yang and Z. Zhang , Electrochem. Commun. 10, 367 (2008). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. V. Laura et al., Electrochim. Acta 395, 139203 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. S. Nasrin et al., Adv. Powder Technol. 32, 304 (2020). Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. C. E. Nebel , Nat. Mater. 12, 780 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. R. Rong and L. Wang , J. Alloys Compd. 850 (2021). Google Scholar
17. R. M. Mohamed and A. A. Ismail , Ceram. Int. 47, 26063 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. S. Ye, R. Chen, Y. Xu, F. Fan, P. Du, F. Zhang, X. Zong, T. Chen, Y. Qi, P. Chen, Z. Chen and C. Li , J. Catal. 338, 168 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. Z. Yi, J. Ye, N. Kikugawa, T. Kako, S. Ouyang, H. Stuart-Williams, H. Yang, J. Cao, W. Luo, Z. Li, Y. Liu and R. L. Withers , Nat. Mater. 9, 559 (2010). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
20. H. Yan, J. Yang, G. Ma, G. Wu, X. Zong, Z. Lei, J. Shi and C. Li , J. Catal. 266, 165 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. X. An, J. C. Yu and J. Tang , J. Mater. Chem. A 2, 1000 (2014). Crossref, Google Scholar
22. Z.-H. Zhao et al., Mater. Chem. Phys. 253, 123325 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. J. Li, X. Ji, X. Li, X. Hu, Y. Sun, J. Ma and G. Qiao , Appl. Surf. Sci. 372, 30 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. S. He et al., Appl. Catal. B: Environ. 281, 119479 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
25. S. Zarezadeh et al., Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 119, 105229 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
26. R. K. Santos et al., ACS Omega 5, 21651 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. W. S. Wang, H. Du, R. X. Wang, T. Wen and A. W. Xu , Nanoscale 5, 3315 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
28. P. Wang, B. Huang, X. Qin, X. Zhang, Y. Dai, J. Wei and M. H. Whangbo , Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47, 7931 (2008). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
29. Q. Li, G. Duan, J. Luo and X. Liu , J. Energy Chem. 27, 826 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
30. J. F. Guo, B. Ma, A. Yin, K. Fan and W. L. Dai , J. Hazard. Mater. 211–212, 77 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
31. S. Sohrabnezhada and A. Pourahmad , Spectrochim. Acta. A: Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 86, 271 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
32. C. Hu, T. Peng, X. Hu, Y. Nie, X. Zhou, J. Qu and H. He , J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 857 (2010). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
33. L. Yang et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 386, 337 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
34. Y. L. Min, G. Q. He, Q. J. Xu and Y. C. Chen , J. Mater. Chem. A 2, 1294 (2014). Crossref, Google Scholar
35. S. Zhu, T. Xu, H. Fu, J. Zhao and Y. Zhu , Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 6234 (2007). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
36. W. Cui, W. An, L. Liu, J. Hu and Y. Liang , J. Solid State Chem. 215, 94 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
37. P. Wang, B. Huang, X. Zhang, X. Qin, H. Jin, Y. Dai, Z. Wang, J. Wei, J. Zhan and S. Wang , Chem. Eur. J. 15, 1821 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
38. X. Bai, L. Wang, Y. Wang, W. Yao and Y. Zhu , Appl. Catal. B: Environ. 152–153, 262 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
39. A. Zhang, L. Zhang, H. Lu, G. Chen, Z. Liu, J. Xiang and L. Sun , J. Hazard. Mater. 314, 78 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
40. X. Yao and X. Liu , J. Hazard. Mater. 280, 260 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
41. M. Zhu, P. Chen, W. Ma, B. Lei and M. Liu , ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 4, 6386 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
42. M. A. Asia, C. He, M. Su, D. Xia, L. Lin, H. Deng, Y. Xiong, R. Qiu and X. Li , Catal. Today 175, 256 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
43. L. Li, L. Chen, H. Shi, X. Chen and W. Lin , J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 4, 1451 (2016). Crossref, Google Scholar
44. D. Liu, Y. Lv, M. Zhang, Y. Liu, Y. Zhu, R. Zong and Y. Zhu , J. Mater. Chem. A 2, 15377 (2014). Crossref, Google Scholar
45. A. N. Koya et al., ACS Nano 15, 6038 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
46. X. Lang et al., Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 94, 8 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
47. D. Huang et al., Chem. Eng. J. 375, 121991 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
48. F. Su et al., Sci. Rep. 11, 85 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar