W. Chen et al. / Journal of Alloys and Compounds 836 (2020) 155401
3
spectrophotometer (Purkinje, China). The specific surface area and
pore size were determined using the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET)
method with N adsorption at 77 K (AutosorbeiQ-MP-C, Quan-
tachrome Instruments, USA). The surface electronic state was
analyzed using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) with a
Thermo Fisher Scientific K-Alpha spectrometer equipped with a
the position of the diffraction peak of porous g-C
change, indicating that the g-C
pore creation process. However, the peak intensities of porous g-
are clearly weaker than those of bulk g-C . This result is
potentially attributed to the formation of mesoporous structures in
the g-C , which has a lower degree of crystal order. The MoS
3
N
4
does not
3 4
N structure is preserved in the
2
C
3
N
4
3 4
N
3
N
4
2
ꢁ
ꢁ
ꢁ
ꢁ
monochromatic Al K
energy values were calibrated using the standard value of adven-
a
source (h6 ¼ 1253.6 eV). All the binding
spectrum exhibits reflections at 14.4 , 32.7 , 39.6 , and 58.4 , which
are indexed to the (002), (100), (103) and (110) lattice planes,
titious carbon (C1s ¼ 284.6 eV) as a reference. Photoluminescence
respectively, of hexagonal MoS
nanosheet was synthesized using the simple solid-state method
with S powder as the S source. For MoS /porous g-C samples,
obvious refection peaks of MoS are not observed, which is likely
attributed to the low loading amounts and good dispersity of MoS
on the surface of g-C [41]. Fig. 2b shows the DRS spectra of bulk
g-C , porous g-C and 1.0% MoS /porous g-C . The absorp-
tion edge of bulk g-C is 450 nm, corresponding to a band gap of
, the absorption edge of porous g-
displays a blueshift of ca. 5 nm, which is probably due to the
2 2
(JPCDS 65e1951). Thus, the MoS
(
PL) spectra and time-resolved photoluminescence (TRPL) decay
spectra were recorded using an Edinburgh FLS980 fluorescence
spectrometer at an excitation wavelength of 325 nm.
2
3 4
N
2
2
2.3. Photoelectrochemical measurements
3 4
N
3
N
4
3
N
4
2
3 4
N
The photocurrent response and a Nyquist plot were obtained
3
N
4
using a CHI760D instrument with a three-electrode system: 0.5 M
Na SO aqueous solution as the electrolyte, platinum wire as the
3 4
2.75 eV. Compared to bulk g-C N
2
4
3 4
C N
counter electrode, and Ag/AgCl as the reference electrode. The
working electrodes were prepared as follows: 5 mg of photocatalyst
were added to 1.0 mL of a 0.1 wt% Nafion aqueous solution and
ultrasonicated for 12 h. Then,100 mL of the slurry was injected onto
quantum effect caused by the ultrathin g-C nanosheet during
3
N
4
pore formation. After loading MoS onto g-C N , a new absorption
2
3 4
band appears at a wavelength longer than 450 nm, which is
attributed to the absorption of MoS . The result confirms the suc-
cessful loading of the MoS cocatalyst onto porous g-C
The SEM image of porous g-C in Fig. 2a shows a highly
porous architecture composed of thin walls, which is attributed to
the confinement effect of the SiO template and the subsequent
thermal oxidation exfoliation. Fig. 2b and c shows SEM images of
ultrathin MoS nanosheets prepared using the simple solid-state
method with S powder as the S source and SiO nanoparticles as
templates. Most of the MoS nanosheets are thinner than 5 nm,
indicating that the confinement effect of the SiO2 template effec-
tively restrains the growth of MoS along the z-axis. However, in
Fig. 2a and b, the MoS morphology clearly differs from g-C
although both these materials were prepared using the same SiO
template. This result is obtained because porous g-C
thesized by the thermal polycondensation method, which typical
produces a regular core-shell structure of g-C @ SiO , resulting in
a regular porous structure after the removal of the SiO template.
However, MoS was prepared by loading the Mo salt on SiO fol-
lowed by sulfuration, which does not facilitate the formation of the
regular core-shell structure of MoS @ SiO , while inhibiting the
MoS nanosheets thinness. Additionally, the strong 2D orientation
enables MoS form an ultrathin nanosheet structure. The TEM
images show 2e9 layers of MoS . From the selected area electron
diffraction image (Fig. 2f), the diffraction rings are indexed to the
diffractions of the (100), (103), and (110) planes of hexagonal MoS
consistent with the XRD results. The N sorption isotherms of both
the porous g-C and the ultrathin MoS nanosheet are repre-
2
ITO glass (1 cm ꢂ 1 cm). The obtained electrodes were dried at
2
3 4
N .
ꢁ
6
0 C for 3 h. A 300 W Xenon lamp (780 nm >
l
> 420 nm) served as
3 4
N
the light source. Before conducting the electrochemical test, Ar was
introduced into the electrolyte to remove the dissolved O
2
.
2
2.4. Measurement of the photocatalytic activity
2
2
Photocatalytic activities for RhB degradation were tested in a
00 mL glass reactor, and a 300 W Xenon lamp with a 420 nm UV-
2
3
cutoff filter was used as a light source. For each reaction, 50 mg of
2
ꢀ1
catalysts were added to 150 mL of the 10 mg L
7
3
RhB (TOC:
.0 mg∙L ) aqueous solution. The suspension was stirred for
0 min in the dark to establish an adsorption-desorption equilib-
2
3
N
4
,
ꢀ1
2
3 4
N was syn-
rium. In the photocatalytic process, the reaction system was
ꢁ
maintained at 20 ± 2 C using a circulating water bath. At 15-min
3
N
4
2
intervals, the RHB concentration was detected with a TU-1901
spectrophotometer based on the RhB absorbance peak near
2
2
2
5
54 nm. Various scavengers were added to the RhB solution,
including 1.0 mmol of isopropanol (IPA), EDTA-2Na, K and p-
benzoquinone (BQ) for quenching hydroxyl radicals (∙OH), holes
2
S
2
O
8
2
2
2
þ
ꢀ
ꢀ
2
), respectively, to
(
h ), electrons (e ) and superoxide radicals (∙O
detect the active species during the photocatalytic reaction. Control
experiments were performed with and without O in a continuous-
flow system using a 250 mL top-irradiation-type reactor with a
2
2
2
2
,
ꢀ
1
quartz window. 50 mg of catalysts and 150 mL of the 10 mg L RhB
solution were added to the aforementioned reactor. Then, a 20%
2
3
N
4
2
O
2
þ 80% N
2
gas mixture or Ar was bubbled into the reactor at a rate
sentative type-IV curves with a H3-type hysteresis loop, indicating
a typical mesoporous structure (Fig. 3). Based on a BJH model, the
of 5 mL/min with constant stirring using a mass flowmeter. The
reactor temperature was maintained at 20 ± 2 C. The aforemen-
ꢁ
pore sizes of the porous g-C
are 31 nm and 9.6 nm, respectively. The pores in the porous g-C
are evidently larger than the SiO particles, which is likely attrib-
uted to the thermal oxidation of the porous g-C surface,
3 4 2
N and the ultrathin MoS nanosheet
tioned 300 W Xenon lamp (
source. Before light irradiation, the reaction was purged with 20%
þ 80% N gas or Ar for 1 h to remove the CO dissolved in the
aqueous solution. The potential gaseous products, such as CO , CO
or H2, were detected using an online GC with an FID detector (MS-
3X) and a TCD detector (TDX-01).
l
> 420 nm) was used as the light
3 4
N
2
O
2
2
2
3 4
N
2
resulting in the formation of large pores [42]. Notably, benefiting
from the porous structure, the specific surface area of porous g-
2
ꢀ1
1
C
C
3
N
N
4
is 153.3 m ∙g , a value that is 12.7 times higher than bulk g-
. A large specific surface area promotes pollutant adsorption
3
4
3
. Results and discussion
and provides more active sites for redox reactions, thereby
increasing the photocatalytic activity. Additionally, the specific
2
ꢀ1
Fig. 1 shows the XRD patterns and DRS spectra of g-C
3
N
4
, MoS
2
surface area of the MoS
which is likely ascribed to its ultrathin structure.
The 1.0% MoS /porous g-C sample was investigated using
TEM to examine the morphology of MoS loaded on porous g-C
and the distribution of MoS on the surface of porous g-C . As
2
nanosheet is as high as 154.4 m ∙g ,
ꢁ
2 3 4
and MoS /g-C N . As shown in Fig. 1a, the diffraction peaks at 13.1
ꢁ
and 27.4 , corresponding to typical (100) inter-plane packing and
002) inter-facial stacking [40], respectively, are observed in both
bulk g-C and porous g-C samples. Compared to bulk g-C
2
3 4
N
(
2
3 4
N
3
N
4
3
N
4
3
N
4
,
2
3 4
N