No abstract

No abstract

While TiO2 nanoparticles have shown potential as photocatalysts in the degradation of organic contaminants, their inability to absorb efficiently visible light has limited their industrial application. One strategy for solving this problem is monodoping TiO2 photocatalysts with transition metals, which has worked in the degradation of several pollutants. However, it is not clear if this improvement is enough to offset the potential environmental impacts of adding metal ions to the synthesis of TiO2. Herein, we have used Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to determine the sustainability of monodoping TiO2 with transition metals (Fe, Co, Mn and Ni, with a 1% weight ratio) to enhance the photocatalytic properties of the photocatalyst toward the degradation of Carbamazepine and Methyl Orange, under UV-A and visible light irradiation. We found that the addition of transition-metals has no significant effect on the environmental impacts associated with the synthesis of TiO2, when a weight-based functional unit was considered. However, when photocatalytic activity was considered, major differences were found. Thus, our results demonstrate that the sustainability of monodoping with different transition metals is solely determined by their ability to enhance (or not) the photocatalytic activity of TiO2. Our data also demonstrated that isopropyl alcohol constitutes a critical point in the synthesis of TiO2 photocatalysts, with ethanol being a potential substitute.

Carbon dots (CDs) are carbon-based nanomaterials with remarkable properties that can be produced from a wide variety of synthesis routes. Given that “standard” bottom-up procedures are typically associated with low synthesis yields, different authors have been trying to devise alternative high-yield fabrication strategies. However, there is a doubt if sustainability-wise, the latter should be really preferred to the former. Herein, we employed a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach to compare and understand the environmental impacts of high-yield and “standard” bottom-up strategies, by applying different life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods. These routes were: (1) production of hydrochar, via the hydrothermal treatment of carbon precursors, and its alkaline peroxide treatment into high-yield CDs; (2) microwave treatment of carbon precursors doped with ethylenediamine; (3) and (6) thermal treatment of carbon precursor and urea; (4) hydrothermal treatment of carbon precursor and urea; (5) microwave treatment of carbon precursor and urea. For this LCA, four LCIA methods were used: ReCiPe, Greenhouse Gas Protocol, AWARE, and USEtox. Results identified CD-5 as the most sustainable synthesis in ReCiPe, Greenhouse Gas Protocol, and USEtox. On the other hand, in AWARE, the most sustainable synthesis was CD-1. It was possible to conclude that, in general, high-yield synthesis (CD-1) was not more sustainable than “standard” bottom-up synthesis, such as CD-5 and CD-6 (also with relatively high-yield). More importantly, high-yield synthesis (CD-1) did not generate much lower environmental impacts than “standard” approaches with low yields, which indicates that higher yields come with relevant environmental costs.