Skip to main content

A study of S-doped TiO2 for photoelectrochemical hydrogen generation from water

Abstract

Sulfur-doped titanium dioxide (TiO2) was investigated as a potential catalyst for photoelectrochemical hydrogen generation. Three preparation techniques were used: first ballmilling sulfur powder with Degussa P25 powder (P25), second, ball milling thiourea with P25, and third a sol–gel technique involving titanium (IV) butoxide and thiourea. The resulting powders were heat-treated and thin-film electrodes were prepared. In all three cases, the heat-treated powders contained small amounts of S (1–3%). However, Rietveld analysis on X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements revealed no significant changes in lattice parameters. For the samples prepared using thiourea, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurements indicated the presence of N and C in the heat-treated powders in addition to S. In all cases, visible-ultraviolet spectroscopy performed on bulk powders confirmed the extension of absorption into the visible region. However, the same spectroscopic technique performed on thin-film electrodes (∼0.5 μm) suggests that the absorption coefficients were very small in the visible region (≤104 m−1). The first and third methods yielded powders with substantially smaller photocatalytic activity relative to P25 powder in the UV region. The electrodes prepared from powders obtained using the second method yielded photocurrents comparable to those prepared from P25 powder.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. Asahi R, Morikawa T, Ohwaki T et al (2001) Science 293:269

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bickley RI, Jayanty RKM, Navio JA et al (1991) Surface Sci 251–252:1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chandra Babu KS, Srivastava ON (1988) Cryst Res Technol 23:555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chaturvedi S, Rodriguez JA, Jirsak T et al (1998) J Phys Chem B 102:7033

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen SZ, Zhang PY, Zhuang DM et al (2004) Catal Commun 5:677

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ciszek JW, Keane ZK, Cheng L et al (2006) J Am Chem Soc 128:3179

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Diwald O, Thompson TL, Zubkov T et al (2004) J Phys Chem B 108:6004

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gopinath CS (2006) J Phys Chem B 110:7079

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Grey I, Madsen I, Bordet P, Wilson N, Li C (2005) In: White T et al. (ed) Advances in Ecomaterials, vol 1, Electrochemistry and Catalysis. Stallion Press, Singapore, p 35

  10. Hebenstreit ELD, Hebenstreit W, Diebold U (2001) Surf Sci 470:347

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Li D, Haneda H, Hishita S et al (2005) Mater Sci Eng: B 117:67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu H, Gao L (2004) J Am Ceram Soc 87:1582

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mitchell PCH, Williams RJP (1960) J Chem Soc 1912

  14. Murphy AB, Barnes PRF, Randeniya LK et al (2006) Int J Hydrogen Energy 31:1999

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Navio JA, Cerrillos CC, Real C (1996) Surf Interface Anal 24:355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Navio JA, Real C, Bickley RI (1994) Surface Interface Anal 22:417

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Neumann B, Bogdanoff P, Tributsch H et al (2005) J Phys Chem B 109:16579

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ohno T, Akiyoshi M, Umebayashi T et al (2004) Appl Catal A: Gen 265:115

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ohno T, Mitsui T, Matsumura M (2003) Chem Lett 32:364

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ohno T, Tsubota T, Nishijima K et al (2004) Chem Lett 33:750

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ohno T, Tsubota T, Toyofuku M et al (2004) Catal Lett 98:255

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Onishi H, Aruga T, Egawa C et al (1988) Surf Sci 193:33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Polcik M, Haase J, Wilde L et al (1997) Surf Sci 381:L568–L572

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Rodriguez JA, Hrbek J, Chang Z et al (2002) Phys Rev B 65:Article No. 235414

  25. Rodriguez JA, Jirsak T, Chaturvedi S et al (1999) Surf Sci 442:400

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Saha NC, Tompkins HG (1992) J Appl Phys 72:3072

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sakthivel S, Janczarek M, Kisch H (2004) J Phys Chem B 108:19384

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sayago DI, Serrano P, Bohme O et al (2001) Surf Sci 482:9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Shimanouchi T (1977) J Phys Chem Ref Data 6:993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Suda Y, Kawasaki H, Ueda T et al (2004) Thin Solid Films 453–54:162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Umebayashi T, Yamaki T, Itoh H et al (2002) Appl Phys Lett 81:454

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Umebayashi T, Yamaki T, Yamamoto S et al (2003) J Appl Phys 93:5156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Wagner CD, Naumkin AV, Kraut-Vass A, Allison JW, Powell CJ, Rumble JR Jr (2003) NIST X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy database, NIST standard reference database 20, Version 3.4 (Web Version) [Web Page]. Available at https://doi.org/srdata.nist.gov/xps/index.htm

  34. Wang S, Gao Q, Wang J (2005) J Phys Chem B 109:17281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Yu JC, Ho W, Yu J et al (2005) Environ Sci Technol 39:1175

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang Q, Wang J, Yin S et al (2004) J Am Ceram Soc 87:1161

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr John Dunlop for assistance with ball milling, and in the interpretation of XRD and SEM measurements, Drs Phil Martin and Avi Bendavid for assistance with XPS measurements, Dr Bin Yang and Dr Victor Luca (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization) for performing the Rietveld analyses and TEM measurements, respectively, and Ms Julie Glasscock for assistance in coating samples and for thickness profiling of coated electrodes.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. K. Randeniya.

Appendix

Appendix

Assignment of XPS peaks

Sulfur peaks

The identification in the literature of S 2p peaks from XPS data has not always been consistent. While a peak at around 163 eV has been consistently identified as S2− species, such as occur with Ti–S bonds [10]; different authors have identified a peak at around 168 eV as S6+/S4+ species, or alternatively as adsorbed SO2.

Umebayashi et al. [31] referred to two articles by Onishi et al. and Sayago et al. [22, 28] to support their identification of the peak as absorbed SO2. The former article in fact identifies this peak as \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) (i.e., S4+). The latter article, discussed below, provides a survey of different literature values. Zhang et al. [36] who also identified a peak at 169 eV as adsorbed SO2, referred to one of the above articles [22] and to a paper [10] that is concerned only with a peak at around 163 eV, which is identified as an S2− peak.

Sayago et al. [28] collected literature values of S 2p peaks for S-based species absorbed on different surfaces, mainly oxides. Their results are shown in Table 2. They noted that there is a large variation of reported values, because the bonding of the SO2 molecule is strongly substrate-dependent for oxide surfaces.

Table 2 Range of S 2p 3/2 binding energies reported for sulfur species on oxide surfaces

Sayago et al. [28] referred to by articles Rodriguez et al. [25] and Polcik et al. [23] as a basis for identification of the physisorbed/multilayer SO2 peak. Rodriguez et al. [24] observed a peak corresponding to physisorbed SO2 between 168 and 171 eV in experiments in which a single-crystal ZnO surface was exposed to SO2 at 110 K. However, these molecules desorbed upon heating to 150 K, and an \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) peak was formed. Moreover, no peaks corresponding to physisorbed SO2 were observed when polycrystalline ZnO films or powders were exposed to SO2. Polcik et al. [23] observed similar behavior when platinum was exposed to SO2 at 90 K. An XPS peak corresponding to multilayer SO2 was observed at 166.4 eV; however, the peak disappeared and was replaced by an \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{4} \) peak when the substrate was heated to room temperature.

The temperatures reached in ball-milling experiments are much greater than those at which physisorbed SO2 becomes desorbed from single-crystal and metallic surfaces. Moreover, TiO2 that is ball-milled with the sulfur compounds is in powder form. Hence, the possibility that the peak at around 168 eV observed in such experiments is associated with physisorbed SO2 can be rejected. The peak should be identified as either \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) (S4+) or \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{4} \) (S6+); such peaks have been observed on oxides in single-crystal, polycrystalline, and powder form, and are present at temperatures up to at least 600 K. For example, Rodriguez et al. [24] identified \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) and \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{4} \) peaks resulting from exposure of polycrystalline ZnO to SO2 at temperatures up to 500 K. They found that \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) and \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{4} \) resulted from the reaction of SO2 with oxygen sites. Rodriguez et al. [24] observed an SOx peak originating from exposure of single-crystal TiO2 to sulfur. A peak associated with S atoms bonded to Ti rows on the surface was also observed; this disappeared upon heating to 550 K.

Nitrogen peaks

Two main N 1s peaks have been observed in XPS measurements of nitrogen-doped TiO2. A peak between 396 and 397 eV has been consistently identified as being due to Ti–N bonds (e.g., [1, 7, 11, 30]). The identification of this peak is based on an XPS study of TiN oxidation chemistry [26].

The second peak, around 400 eV, is generally assigned to molecularly chemisorbed N2, (e.g., [1, 5, 11]), again based on Saha and Tompkins’s study [26]. However, the peak at 400 eV has also been assigned to hyponitrite (\( {\text{N}}_{2} {\text{O}}^{{2 - }}_{2} \)) species, [27] to the presence of NHx species, [7] and to organic compounds. [8] The hyponitrite peak has been identified in studies of photo-oxidative nitrogen fixation on UV-illuminated TiO2 surfaces [2, 15, 16]. These studies show that adsorbed nitrogen is oxidized to hyponitrite anions (\( {\text{N}}_{2} {\text{O}}^{{2 - }}_{2} \)), which can be further oxidized to nitrite anions (\( {\text{NO}}^{ - }_{2} \)) and nitrate anions (\( {\text{NO}}^{ - }_{3} \)). The binding energies of these peaks are given in Table 3.

Table 3 N 1s binding energies reported for oxidized nitrogen species on TiO2 surfaces after Navio et al. [15]

Oxygen peaks

The O 1s peak corresponding to Ti–O bonds occurs at 530 eV [26]. Navio et al. [16] have identified a further peak at 531.7 ± 0.1 eV corresponding to adsorbed hyponitrite species. Studies of SO2 absorption on metal and oxide surfaces [4, 25] have identified a peak at around 531.5 eV that has been assigned to \( {\text{SO}}^{{2 - }}_{3} \) species.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Randeniya, L.K., Murphy, A.B. & Plumb, I.C. A study of S-doped TiO2 for photoelectrochemical hydrogen generation from water. J Mater Sci 43, 1389–1399 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-2309-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-2309-z

Keywords

  • TiO2
  • Rutile
  • Thiourea
  • Coated Sample
  • Tetrabutyl Titanate