Table 1.
Different photoelectrodes and their photoelectrochemical performance
| Photoelectrode | Photocurrent (mA cm−2) | Experimental condition | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TiO2−xCx nanotube array | 1.0 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 1 M KOH(aq), 2500 W Xe lamp (100 mw cm−2), >420 nm | 35 |
| N-doped TiO2 nanotube arrays | 0.182 | 0 V versus calomel electrode, 0.01 M Na2SO4 (aq), 250 W halogen lamp, >400 nm | 36 |
| S-doped TiO2 nanotube arrays | 0.41 | 0.1 V versus SCE, 0.1 M Na2SO4 (aq), 50 W fiber optic illuninator, >400 nm | 37 |
| Au nanoparticle-decorated TiO2 nanowire electrodes | 1.49 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 1 M NaOH(aq), white-light illumination (100 mW cm−2) | 40 |
| Au decorated ZnO nanowire arrays | 1.5 | 1 V versus RHE, 0.5 M Na2SO4 (aq), 300 W Xe lamp (100 mW cm−2), >420 nm | 42 |
| CdTe/TiO2 | 0.44 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.6 M Na2S (aq), 300 W Xe arc lamp (6.0 W cm−2 >400 nm | 43 |
| CdS/TiO2 | 5.6 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.1 M Na2S (aq), 300 W Oriel solar simulator (100 mW cm−2) | 46 |
| Bi2WO6/TiO2 | 0.014 | 1 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.5 M Na2SO4 (aq), 300 W Xe lamp, >420 nm | 47 |
| CdS/TiO2/WO3 | 1.6 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.05 M Na2S (aq), 300 W Xe lamp, >495 nm | 50 |
| Hydrogen-treated TiO2 nanowire arrays | 1.97 | −0.6 V versus Ag/AgCl, 1 M NaOH(aq), 150 W Xe lamp (100 mW cm−2) | 52 |
| N-doped ZnO nanowire arrays | ~0.15 | 0.5 V versus NHE, 0.5 M NaClO4 (aq), white light source (100 mW cm−2) | 56 |
| WO3/BiVO4 | 0.8 | 0.5 V versus NHE, 0.5 M Na2SO4 (aq), chopped white light (100 mW cm−2) | 58 |
| FeOOH | 10 | 0.55 V versus RHE, 1 M Na2CO3 (aq), 150 W Xe arc lamp (100 mW cm−2), >400 nm | 60 |
| IrO2·nH2O/TaON | ~3.75 | 0.6 V versus Ag/AgCl,, 0.1 M Na2SO4 (aq), chopped visible light | 65 |
| IrO2-loaded Ta3N5 | 3.6 | 0.6 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.1 M Na2SO4 (aq), 300 W Xe lamp, >400 nm | 67 |
| TiO2 nanoarrays sensitized with CdS quantum dots | 3.98 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 1.0 M KOH (aq), 300 W Xe lamp (100 mW cm−2), >420 nm | 68 |
| Pt–In2S3/CuInS2 | −17.5 to −7.0 | 0 V versus RHE, 0.1 M Na2SO4 (aq), 300 W Xe lamp | 74 |
| Pt–CdS/CuGaSe2 | −3.2 | 0 V versus RHE, 0.05 M Na2HPO4(aq) + 0.05 M NaH2PO4(aq), 150 W Xe lamp | 18 |
| p–n Cu2O homojuction | −0.2 | 0 V versus NHE, 0.5 M Na2SO4 (aq), 500 W Xe lamp | 79 |
| Pt/ZnO, Al2O3, TiO2/Cu2O | −7.6 | 0 V versus RHE, 1 M Na2SO4 (aq), 500 W Xe lamp (100 mW cm−2), visible light | 80 |
| Photoanode: TiO2 | 0.2 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 1 M NaOH(aq), 500 W Xe lamp | 83 |
| Photocathode: CaFe2O4 | |||
| Photoanode: WO3 | 0.02 | 3 M H2SO4(aq), 250 W Oriel tungsten–halogen quartz lamp (200 mW cm−2) | 84 |
| Photocathode: GaInP2 | |||
| Photoanode: Bi2S3/TNA | 1.6 | 0 V versus Ag/AgCl, 0.25 M Na2S + 0.125 M Na2SO3, Xe lamp (100 mW cm−2), >400 nm | 19 |
| Photocathode: Pt/SiPVC |