TiO2 nanostructures can offer advantages such as high surface-are

TiO2 nanostructures can offer advantages such as high surface-area-to-volume selleck products ratio, enhancing in this way the amount of the photo-generated charges. TiO2 nanoparticles have been largely tested and demonstrated

successful results [11]. However, there are some issues that strongly limit their application: poor light penetration due to nanoparticle agglomeration and the post-recovery of the particles after the water treatment [8]. An alternative to suspension is the thin film system where the photocatalyst is present as a thin film on the reactor walls [12], and recent investigations are oriented toward photocatalyst immobilization [7, 8]. This kind of reactor promotes light penetration, and the coated area may be increased by packing with a material coated with the photocatalyst. A recent work experimentally quantified the Crenigacestat charge diffusion length in high-quality

titania: 3.2 nm for the anatase phase and 1.6 nm for the rutile phase, showing that a surface region of a few-nanometer depth provides charge carriers for photoreactions [13]. This clearly means that AZD1480 trial the use of a thick titania is useless. Based on the above-mentioned considerations, we studied the photocatalytic activity of a TiO2 thin film covering a nanostructured Si template in degrading dyes in water. The titania film (10 nm thick) was obtained by atomic layer deposition (ALD). The ALD technique provided the possibility to efficiently enhance the exposed surface of the TiO2 since it offers an excellent conformality on high-aspect-ratio structures, as well as a great thickness control at atomic level [14]. The ALD was already used to create thicker (>30 nm) nanostructured TiO2, starting from nanotemplates [15, 16]. Of course, thinner layers avoid a waste of material and enhance the nanostructuring effect. It is worth noting that highly anisotropic nanostructures such as nanotubes, nanorods, Carnitine dehydrogenase nanowires, and nanoribbons have been explored, but it

is hard to compare the data from the literature in order to disentangle the real effect of the surface/volume enhancement from other contributions because of the complexity of the photocatalysis mechanism and the delicacy of the characterization techniques [12]. For example, most nanostructures are polycrystalline and the effect of grain boundaries and structural defects on charge transport cannot be neglected, especially when highlighting the beneficial effect of a certain photocatalyst shape over another one. Therefore, it is relevant to test the photocatalytic properties on a nanostructured material that has a reference with the same structural and compositional properties in a flat shape.

Comments are closed.