Comparison of degradation efficiency for different photocatalysts.
| photocatalyst | Additive amount (mg) | MB concentration (mg L−1) | Degradation rate (%) | Irradiation time (min) | Degradation rate constant (min−1 gcat−1) | Light source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This study | 9 | 10 | 90 | 50 | 5.095 | 300 W tungsten lamp (λ > 350 nm) |
| Au/Cu2O nanospheres38 | 15 | 5 | 85 | 120 | 2.860 | 300 W Xe lamp (λ > 420 nm) |
| Cu@Cu2O nanocomposite39 | 10 | 10 | 96.5 | 50 | 6.705 | 300 W UV light (100 < λ < 450) |
| Hierarchical Cu2O (ref. 40) | 25 | 10 | 55 | 120 | 0.266 | 200 W Hg–Xe arc lamp (λ > 420 nm) |
| Cu2O{111}-rGO (ref. 41) | 15 | 10 | 72 | 120 | 0.723 | 400 W metal halide lamp (λ > = 420 nm) |
| Ag/Cu2O (ref. 42) | 20 | 10 | 96.5 | 120 | 1.365 | 500 W xenon lamp (λ > 400 nm) |
| Cu2O/ZnWO4 (ref. 43) | 100 | 10 ppm | 90 | 90 | 1.054 | 300 W Xe lamp (λ > 420 nm) |