Loading…
Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations
The chemical literature often does not differentiate between photocatalytic (PC) and photosynthetic (PS) processes (including artificial photosynthesis) even though these reactions differ in their thermodynamics. Photocatalytic processes are thermodynamically downhill (ΔG < 0) and are merely acce...
Saved in:
Published in: | ACS energy letters 2017-02, Vol.2 (2), p.445-453 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743 |
container_end_page | 453 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 445 |
container_title | ACS energy letters |
container_volume | 2 |
creator | Osterloh, Frank E |
description | The chemical literature often does not differentiate between photocatalytic (PC) and photosynthetic (PS) processes (including artificial photosynthesis) even though these reactions differ in their thermodynamics. Photocatalytic processes are thermodynamically downhill (ΔG < 0) and are merely accelerated by the catalyst, whereas photosynthetic processes are thermodynamically unfavorable (ΔG > 0) and require photochemical energy input to occur. Here we apply this differentiation to analyze the basic functions of PC and PS devices and to formulate design criteria for improved performance. As will be shown, the corresponding devices exhibit distinctly different sensitivities to their functional parameters. For example, under conditions of optimal light absorption, carrier lifetimes, and electrochemical rates, the performance of PCs is limited only by their surface area, while type 1 PS devices are limited by their carrier mobility and mass transport, and type 2 PS devices are limited by electrochemical charge-transfer selectivity. Strategies for the optimization of type 1 and 2 photosynthetic devices and photocatalysts are also discussed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00665 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>acs_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1341470</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>b684161135</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUEtLAzEQDqJgqf4EIXjfmuwmu9FbqfUBBYXWc8hms27KNpFMWtibP930cdCTzGGG78XwIXRDyYSSnN4pDcaZ8Dn0JsZJWRNSlvwMjfJCkEzQe37-675E1wBrQggtBU8zQt_vnY9eq6j6ASzgnQmwBXxAYXCxMwl9wFO8NA5stDsbBzx1J7Vv8aPZWW0Atz7gpe9VwPPDO3jm3T7MeoeVa_CsMxurVY9XQTlI6o2KiYMrdNGqHsz1aY_Rx9N8NXvJFm_Pr7PpIlOs4DHTqi0bVrVMCUoIV0TVPC_rQhQJaJnmLTeMNpUQeW1IZQhlpRCa1U1BalaxYoxuj7keopWgbTS60945o6OkBaOsIknEjyIdPEAwrfwKdqPCICmR-7rln7rlqe7ko0dfouXab0MqCP7x_AAI8ouM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations</title><source>American Chemical Society:Jisc Collections:American Chemical Society Read & Publish Agreement 2022-2024 (Reading list)</source><creator>Osterloh, Frank E</creator><creatorcontrib>Osterloh, Frank E ; Univ. of California, Davis, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><description>The chemical literature often does not differentiate between photocatalytic (PC) and photosynthetic (PS) processes (including artificial photosynthesis) even though these reactions differ in their thermodynamics. Photocatalytic processes are thermodynamically downhill (ΔG < 0) and are merely accelerated by the catalyst, whereas photosynthetic processes are thermodynamically unfavorable (ΔG > 0) and require photochemical energy input to occur. Here we apply this differentiation to analyze the basic functions of PC and PS devices and to formulate design criteria for improved performance. As will be shown, the corresponding devices exhibit distinctly different sensitivities to their functional parameters. For example, under conditions of optimal light absorption, carrier lifetimes, and electrochemical rates, the performance of PCs is limited only by their surface area, while type 1 PS devices are limited by their carrier mobility and mass transport, and type 2 PS devices are limited by electrochemical charge-transfer selectivity. Strategies for the optimization of type 1 and 2 photosynthetic devices and photocatalysts are also discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2380-8195</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2380-8195</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00665</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Chemical Society</publisher><subject>SOLAR ENERGY</subject><ispartof>ACS energy letters, 2017-02, Vol.2 (2), p.445-453</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9288-3407 ; 0000000292883407</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/1341470$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Osterloh, Frank E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Univ. of California, Davis, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><title>Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations</title><title>ACS energy letters</title><addtitle>ACS Energy Lett</addtitle><description>The chemical literature often does not differentiate between photocatalytic (PC) and photosynthetic (PS) processes (including artificial photosynthesis) even though these reactions differ in their thermodynamics. Photocatalytic processes are thermodynamically downhill (ΔG < 0) and are merely accelerated by the catalyst, whereas photosynthetic processes are thermodynamically unfavorable (ΔG > 0) and require photochemical energy input to occur. Here we apply this differentiation to analyze the basic functions of PC and PS devices and to formulate design criteria for improved performance. As will be shown, the corresponding devices exhibit distinctly different sensitivities to their functional parameters. For example, under conditions of optimal light absorption, carrier lifetimes, and electrochemical rates, the performance of PCs is limited only by their surface area, while type 1 PS devices are limited by their carrier mobility and mass transport, and type 2 PS devices are limited by electrochemical charge-transfer selectivity. Strategies for the optimization of type 1 and 2 photosynthetic devices and photocatalysts are also discussed.</description><subject>SOLAR ENERGY</subject><issn>2380-8195</issn><issn>2380-8195</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFUEtLAzEQDqJgqf4EIXjfmuwmu9FbqfUBBYXWc8hms27KNpFMWtibP930cdCTzGGG78XwIXRDyYSSnN4pDcaZ8Dn0JsZJWRNSlvwMjfJCkEzQe37-675E1wBrQggtBU8zQt_vnY9eq6j6ASzgnQmwBXxAYXCxMwl9wFO8NA5stDsbBzx1J7Vv8aPZWW0Atz7gpe9VwPPDO3jm3T7MeoeVa_CsMxurVY9XQTlI6o2KiYMrdNGqHsz1aY_Rx9N8NXvJFm_Pr7PpIlOs4DHTqi0bVrVMCUoIV0TVPC_rQhQJaJnmLTeMNpUQeW1IZQhlpRCa1U1BalaxYoxuj7keopWgbTS60945o6OkBaOsIknEjyIdPEAwrfwKdqPCICmR-7rln7rlqe7ko0dfouXab0MqCP7x_AAI8ouM</recordid><startdate>20170210</startdate><enddate>20170210</enddate><creator>Osterloh, Frank E</creator><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9288-3407</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000292883407</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170210</creationdate><title>Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations</title><author>Osterloh, Frank E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>SOLAR ENERGY</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Osterloh, Frank E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Univ. of California, Davis, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>ACS energy letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Osterloh, Frank E</au><aucorp>Univ. of California, Davis, CA (United States)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations</atitle><jtitle>ACS energy letters</jtitle><addtitle>ACS Energy Lett</addtitle><date>2017-02-10</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>2</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>445</spage><epage>453</epage><pages>445-453</pages><issn>2380-8195</issn><eissn>2380-8195</eissn><abstract>The chemical literature often does not differentiate between photocatalytic (PC) and photosynthetic (PS) processes (including artificial photosynthesis) even though these reactions differ in their thermodynamics. Photocatalytic processes are thermodynamically downhill (ΔG < 0) and are merely accelerated by the catalyst, whereas photosynthetic processes are thermodynamically unfavorable (ΔG > 0) and require photochemical energy input to occur. Here we apply this differentiation to analyze the basic functions of PC and PS devices and to formulate design criteria for improved performance. As will be shown, the corresponding devices exhibit distinctly different sensitivities to their functional parameters. For example, under conditions of optimal light absorption, carrier lifetimes, and electrochemical rates, the performance of PCs is limited only by their surface area, while type 1 PS devices are limited by their carrier mobility and mass transport, and type 2 PS devices are limited by electrochemical charge-transfer selectivity. Strategies for the optimization of type 1 and 2 photosynthetic devices and photocatalysts are also discussed.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Chemical Society</pub><doi>10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00665</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9288-3407</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000292883407</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2380-8195 |
ispartof | ACS energy letters, 2017-02, Vol.2 (2), p.445-453 |
issn | 2380-8195 2380-8195 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1341470 |
source | American Chemical Society:Jisc Collections:American Chemical Society Read & Publish Agreement 2022-2024 (Reading list) |
subjects | SOLAR ENERGY |
title | Photocatalysis versus Photosynthesis: A Sensitivity Analysis of Devices for Solar Energy Conversion and Chemical Transformations |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T10%3A30%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-acs_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Photocatalysis%20versus%20Photosynthesis:%20A%20Sensitivity%20Analysis%20of%20Devices%20for%20Solar%20Energy%20Conversion%20and%20Chemical%20Transformations&rft.jtitle=ACS%20energy%20letters&rft.au=Osterloh,%20Frank%20E&rft.aucorp=Univ.%20of%20California,%20Davis,%20CA%20(United%20States)&rft.date=2017-02-10&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=445&rft.epage=453&rft.pages=445-453&rft.issn=2380-8195&rft.eissn=2380-8195&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00665&rft_dat=%3Cacs_osti_%3Eb684161135%3C/acs_osti_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a435t-caf6d47f4a81005a0ab526b383a81f4c5f5e41d7882be07e014688c4bd30b4743%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |