Table 1

Comparison of the physical properties, bandgap energy of the synthesized materials, and methane production
Samples N2 sorption UV-vis CH4 production comparison
SBET PV APD WL BE P Reference
[Ti-K-6 (dried) (Si/Ti = 200)] calcined 865 1.11 6.55 - - - -
[Ti-K-6 (dried) (Si/Ti = 100)] calcined 767 0.80 6.48 - - - -
[Ti-K-6 (dried) (Si/Ti = 50)] calcined 730 0.67 6.45 - - - -
KIT-6 (K-6) calcined 772 1.04 6.49 - - - -
[Ti-K-6 (calcined) (Si/Ti = 200)] calcined 726 0.95 6.45 320 3.87 - -
[Ti-K-6 (calcined) (Si/Ti = 100)] calcined 700 0.85 6.40 330 3.75 4.1 This work
[Ti-K-6 (calcined) (Si/Ti = 50)] calcined 684 0.73 6.41 372 3.33 - -
Anatase TiO2 powder - - - - - 0.4 [18]
Aeroxide/degussa P25 TiO2 - - - - - 0.6 This work
Titanium silicate (TS-1) zeolite - - - - - 2.7 [16]
Ti-MCM-41 - - - - - 2.9 [16]

SBET, BET specific surface area in m2/g; PV, cumulative pore volume in cm3/g; APD, average pore diameter in nm; WL, absorption edge wave length, λ, in nm; BE, bandgap energy in eV; P, production rate in μmol · gcat.−1 · h−1).

Akhter et al.

Akhter et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2014 9:158   doi:10.1186/1556-276X-9-158

Open Data