Science Advances

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

  • Materials characterizations
  • Three-dimensional tomographic reconstruction of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) network
  • Comparison of the samples synthesized by laser-chemical route and traditional heating method
  • Control experiments to confirm the origin of the evolved CO
  • fig. S1. Structure of the selected rigid TPA linkers and soft TEG linkers for the laser synthesis of the nickel-organic photocatalyst.
  • fig. S2. Morphology and composition of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) composite.
  • fig. S3. Nitrogen physisorption measurements of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) catalyst.
  • fig. S4. A comparison between the measured and simulated powder XRD patterns of the crystalline Ni(TPA) framework.
  • fig. S5. Electron diffraction of the Ni(TPA/TEG) catalyst.
  • fig. S6. STEM images show the morphologies of five nickel-organic composites synthesized either by the laser-chemical approach (L) or the conventional heating method (H).
  • fig. S7. Comparison of the structure of Ni(TPA/TEG) and Ni(TPA) composites synthesized by both laser-chemical (L) and heating (H) methods.
  • fig. S8. Brunauer-Emmett-Teller surface area of five as-synthesized nickelorganic composites, including Ni(TPA/TEG) (L), Ni(TEG) (L), Ni(TPA)-DMF (L), Ni(TPA)-TEG (H), and Ni(TPA)-DMF (H).
  • fig. S9. CO production rate on different amounts of the Ni(TPA/TEG) catalyst.
  • fig. S10. Powder XRD patterns of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) catalyst before and after 24-hour photocatalytic reactions.
  • fig. S11. Controlled photocatalysis experiments by applying the Ni(TPA/TEG) (L) catalyst in either CO2 or He gas, and without adding catalyst in CO2.
  • fig. S12. Comparison of the morphology and structure of the five lasersynthesized M(TPA/TEG) (M = Ni, Co, Cu) catalysts, including Ni(TPA/TEG),
    NiCo(TPA/TEG), Co(TPA/TEG), NiCoCu(TPA/TEG), and Cu(TPA/TEG).
  • fig. S13. Comparison of the yield of CO and H2 on five laser-synthesized M(TPA/TEG) (M = Ni, Co, Cu) catalysts after a 6-hour photocatalytic CO2 reduction reaction.
  • fig. S14. Comparison of the gas products evolved from the laser-synthesized Ni(TPA/TEG) and Ni(TEG) catalysts.
  • fig. S15. MS of acetic acid (CH3COOH) produced from the photocatalytic reduction of CO2 using the Ni(TPA/TEG)-Ag catalyst.
  • fig. S16. Comparison of the liquid products generated from photocatalytic CO2RR and CORR on the Ni(TPA/TEG)-Rh catalyst.
  • fig. S17. STEM image of the Ag-decorated Ni(TPA/TEG) catalyst.
  • fig. S18. Comparison of the liquid products generated from photocatalytic CO reduction reactions on the Ni(TPA/TEG)-Ag catalyst at pH 8 and 13.
  • fig. S19. Proposed three-cell tandem photocatalytic CO2 reduction system for liquid fuels production.
  • table S1. List of other heterogeneous catalysts used for photocatalytic CO2-to-CO conversion.
  • Legends for movies S1 to S3
  • References (50–55)

Download PDF

Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

  • movie S1 (.mpg format). Three-dimensional reconstructed tomography of a fraction of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) composite.
  • movie S2 (.mov format). Scanning nanobeam diffraction pattern series showing the 100 orientation of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) composite.
  • movie S3 (.mov format). Scanning nanobeam diffraction pattern series taken along the 111 orientation of the spongy Ni(TPA/TEG) composite.

Files in this Data Supplement: