Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673e697
www.keaipublishing.com/gee

Review article

Advances in particulate matter filtration: Materials, performance,

and application
Xuzheng Ji a, Jianying Huang a,b,*, Lin Teng a,b, Shuhui Li c, Xiao Li a,b, Weilong Cai a,b,*,
Zhong Chen d, Yuekun Lai a,b,*
a
College of Chemical Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, 350116, China
b
Qingyuan Innovation Laboratory, Quanzhou, 362801, China
c
Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, WC1H 0AJ, UK
d
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore
Received 6 December 2021; revised 23 March 2022; accepted 28 March 2022
Available online 6 April 2022

Abstract

Air-borne pollutants in particulate matter (PM) form, produced either physically during industrial processes or certain biological routes, have
posed a great threat to human health. Particularly during the current COVID-19 pandemic, effective filtration of the virus is an urgent matter
worldwide. In this review, we first introduce some fundamentals about PM, including its source and classification, filtration mechanisms, and
evaluation parameters. Advanced filtration materials and their functions are then summarized, among which polymers and MOFs are discussed
in detail together with their antibacterial performance. The discussion on the application is divided into end-of-pipe treatment and source control.
Finally, we conclude this review with our prospective view on future research in this area.
© 2022 Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communi-
cations Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Air filtration; PM capture; End-of-pipe treatment; Source control; COVID-19

1. Introduction from ambient air pollution annually [14]. Besides, exposure to

With the rapid development of the economy and industri-
alization, particulate matter (PM) has become a major source
of air pollutants and posed a serious threat to the future
environment and human health [1–9]. It can form a grey
yellow and sunless haze obscuring the sky, causing regional
climate changes by influencing solar and infrared radiation in
the atmosphere, contaminating rivers and lakes, and damaging
forests' ecology environment, and agricultural systems [10–
13]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO)
global air quality guidelines, about 4–9 million people die
* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: jyhuang@fzu.edu.cn (J. Huang), wl.cai@fzu.edu.cn (W.
Cai), yklai@fzu.edu.cn (Y. Lai).
air pollution may increase the incidence and mortality from a
greater number of diseases than those currently thought, such
as Alzheimer's and other neurological diseases [14,15]. Evi-
dence is mounting of causal relationships between PM2.5
exposure and all-cause mortality, as well as chronic obstruc-
tive pulmonary disease, acute lower respiratory infections,
ischemic heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer [14]. Particu-
larly in recent years, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-
19) pandemic has witnessed severe respiratory illness in most
parts of the world [16]. Hereafter, due to people detecting
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-
2) viral RNA provoking the COVID-19 from the surface of
PM aerosol in public places, it is now understood that the virus
spread in the form of aerosol [17–20].
There are two different strategies to eliminate or reduce the
risks caused by PM. One is the so-called end-of-pipe

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gee.2022.03.012
2468-0257/© 2022 Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co.,
Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
674 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
treatment, which handles the risk close to the end-users
through masks for personal protection or filtration in public
premises (e.g., indoor air purifier and central air conditioning
and ventilation system) [3,21]. The other approach is source
control namely energy conservation and emission reduction,
which manages the risk at the PM generation site [22]. Source
control can be further divided into two aspects: one is to
optimize the industrial technology and improve resource
quality and cleanliness. It is a long-term process that requires
continuous effort from scientists, engineers, as well as law
enforcement [12]. The other one is to install dust removal
facilities to reduce emissions at the source of particulate
matter generation, including bag filter, electrostatic precipita-
tor (ESP), gasoline particulate filter (GPF), and so on [23–25].
Here, we summarize recent advances in PM filtration
technology from the materials to the performance and appli-
cation outlook. First, the review introduces some basic con-
cepts involved in PM filtration, such as classification and
source of PM, classic filtration mechanism, and the key
evaluation parameters of PM filtration. Second, we analyze
different advanced filtration materials including polymers,
porous metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), carbon-based
materials, and some others. Third, some interesting additional
functions that can enhance filtration effect of these materials
are introduced. For example, antibacterial property and special
wettability are discussed in relation to PM filtration. Fourth,
potential applications are discussed following the above-
mentioned end-of-pipe treatment and source control strategies.
Finally, a conclusion will be made, and future prospective
views proposed based on the summarized current research
achievements and challenges of PM filtration.
2. Basic theory
2.1. PM
Particulate matter is a complex mixture and the main
component of air pollution [26,27]. Generally, it contains
organic and elemental carbon, inorganic matter such as NO
3,


SO2
4 , Cl , SiO 2 , and heavy metals, and is found as in form of
tiny liquid droplets and small suspended solid particles [28].
Based on the differences of chemical components, PM can be
categorized as non-oily or oily particles, bioaerosol (contains
bacteria or viruses) and non-biological aerosol [29,30]. NaCl
particle and dioctyl phthalate (DOP) aerosol are most
commonly used for the non-oily and oily model pollutant,
respectively [21,30]. Based on surface wettability and physical
states, PM can be classified as wetting liquid droplets, non-
wetting liquid droplets, and solid particles [31]. Based on the
aerodynamic diameter, PM can be classified as coarse parti-
cles (>2.5 mm in size) such as PM10, fine particles (2.5 mm in
size) such as PM2.5 and PM0.3, and ultrafine particles
(0.1 mm in size) such as PM0.1 [32]. In particular, it is worth
noting the size classification of PM. For instance, since
notorious PM2.5 has a small diameter of no greater than
2.5 mm, they can penetrate into the alveoli and blood circu-
latory system and cause an increased health risk, especially
when they carry bacteria or viruses with them [33–37].
Currently, many countries have set up PM2.5 and PM10
monitoring systems, and relevant standards and protection
products are available based on aerodynamic features of PM
[38–42]. Accordingly, it will be more convenient to follow the
classification based on aerodynamic diameters in this review
article.
PM sources can be categorized as natural and human ac-
tivities (Fig. 1). The natural sources include re-suspended road
or soil dust, sandstorm, volcanic eruption, sea spray, naturally
ignited grassland, and forest fire [26,27,34]. However, the
sources of PM are predominantly through anthropogenic ac-
tivities, such as incomplete fossil fuel-related energy com-
bustion, industrial emissions, mining and quarrying activities,
agriculture production, construction dust, household heating,
and vehicle exhaust [4,12,20,43]. On the basis of the source
and formation mechanism of PM, source control and end-of-
pipe treatment have been proposed. End-of-pipe treatment can
only control air quality in a confined space. On the contrary,
source control such as improving resource quality and using
industrial dust removal facilities represent more fundamental
measures to eradicate pollution [22].
2.2. Mechanisms of PM filtration
2.2.1. Passive trap
According to the classical single-fiber filtration theories, the
passive trap of PM, also known as mechanical capture
mechanism, includes interception, inertial impaction, diffu-
sion, and gravity (Fig. 2a). This approach is the primary
mechanism and is used in most of the current commercial
filters [3,44,45].
The passive trap mechanism is relevant to particulate
diameter, interception and inertial impaction play a key role
when diameter greater than 0.3 mm, while diffusion is the
dominant mechanism when the diameter is smaller than
0.1 mm [46]. Interception, or sieving, takes place when the
particle diameter is more than filter pore size or the particulate
does not have enough inertia to separate from the air
streamline [45]. When the large particles have sufficient
Fig. 1. A schematic illustrating the sources of PM.
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 675

Fig. 2. (a) Schematic the major mechanisms of PM filtration: interception, inertial impaction, diffusion, gravity, and electrostatic attraction. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [45]. Copyright (2007) Elsevier. (b–d) Photograph of the in-situ capture of (b) wetting liquid droplets, (c) nonwetting liquid droplets, and (d)
solid particles. Insets: Schematic showing the formation of three PM aerosols on PI nanofibers, respectively. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [31]. Copyright
(2018) American Chemical Society.

inertia and momentum to break away from fluid streamlines
and directly impact the filter surface fibers, inertial impaction
will occur [45]. Diffusion of small particles (<0.1 mm) is
known as Brownian motion, which will lead to small particles
deviating from air streamline to adhere on fibers [44–47].
Lastly, PM could be passively trapped in the filter by gravity
when airflow is perpendicular to the ground [47].
In addition, filtration performance is also closely related to
the material structure, packing density (i.e., porosity), thick-
ness, face velocity, etc. Packing density is an important geo-
metric parameter of purification material. A higher packing
density results in lower porosity and smaller pore size. Thus,
the smaller pores form the stronger interception effect and a
better filtration performance [48]. Increasing the thickness of
the filtration medium also raises filtration performance via
decreasing aerosol penetration [48]. Though improving pack-
ing density and thickness both enhance the performance,
Leung et al. found that packing density has more a prominent
effect on most penetrating particle size than the thickness [49].
As for face velocity, Leung et al. compared filtration perfor-
mance over particles size range from 50 to 480 nm with
respect to face velocity from 5 to 10 cm s
1. The experimental
results show that the reduction in filtration efficiency becomes
greater at smaller particle sizes. For particulate larger than
300 nm in size, the filtration efficiency remains virtually un-
changed when the face velocity was increased [49]. This is
because increasing the face velocity equates to reducing the
residence time of particles in the filter medium, thereby
reducing the chance of small particles colliding with fibers
through diffusion [49]. Since diffusion is the primary capture
mechanism for particulates smaller than 100 nm, the filtration
efficiency of these particles is mostly affected [49].
Despite the good establishment of single fiber model, the
dynamic trap and evolution processes of three nanoscale
aerosols (i.e., wetting liquid droplets, nonwetting liquid
droplets, and solid particles) are not yet fully understood [31].
Cui's group has systematically investigated the in-situ capture
and evolution of nanoscale aerosols on polyimide (PI) nano-
fibers (Fig. 2b–d). They found both wetting liquid droplets
with a small contact angle (CA) and nonwetting liquid drop-
lets with a large CA can coalesce into bigger droplets. The
difference is the former can move on PI nanofiber and form
676 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
axisymmetric conformations, while the latter cannot [31].
Solid particles neither move along the surface of nanofibers
nor coalesce, they will ultimately form dendritic structures via
weak van der Waals forces [31].
2.2.2. Proactive capture
For small particulates in the range of 0.05–0.5 mm, which
are too large for diffusion and yet much small to have enough
momentum for inertial impaction, capturing by air filter be-
comes most challenging [45,50]. In such a case, making use of
chemical forces and/or electrical forces through the proactive
capture route is clearly a better strategy [44]. Electrostatic
attraction between PM and filter enables the PM that is
diverted from the airflow streamline to be attached to the fiber
surface [45] (Fig. 2a). Surgical mask and N95 facemask use
such principle by preparing charged melt-blown nonwovens as
the filter materials to capture PM including bioaerosol.
Electrical force is predominant when the PM is charged or
the external electric field is applied to filtration material [44,50–
52]. There is an advantage of this proactive capture method
since there is no pressure drop with improved filtration effi-
ciency as other methods do [51,52]. For instance, Xie et al. [52]
made the PM negatively charged by the ionizer and applied a
positive voltage to the carbonized cellulose aerogel. As a result,
the electric field force enabled the PM2.5 to adsorb on the
aerogel efficiently (>99.91%), and this process had no pressure
drop. On the contrary, if the traditional filtration materials seek
to improve the filtration performance by increasing the thick-
ness or packing density and reducing the fiber diameter, the
pressure drop will be significantly increased [48,49].
Chemical forces are derived between advanced filtration
materials with high dipole moment and the surface of PM with
high-polarity functional groups such as C–N, C–O, –SO3H,
and –NO3 [53]. There is a stronger dipole–dipole and induced-
dipole intermolecular interaction between advanced filtration
materials and PM, resulting in PM adhesion via electrostatic
attraction [44,50]. For example, Cui et al. [53] regulated PM
adhesion through surface chemical control strategies. They
firstly compared the dipole moments of polyacrylonitrile
(PAN), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), polystyrene (PS), poly-
vinyl alcohol (PVA), and polypropylene (PP) repeating units to
be 3.6, 2.3, 0.7, 1.2, and 0.6 D, respectively (Fig. 3a). Further
performance test results showed that PAN with the highest
dipole moment owned the best filtration efficiency [53]
(Fig. 3b). There are many different sizes of contaminants in
the air and among them, the virus is smaller than dust, bac-
teria, pollen, etc. [29] The size of the COVID-19 virus only
ranges from 60 to 140 nm [54]. Since small-sized aerosols are
more likely to penetrate material pores, it is a great challenge
to filtrate nanoscale virus aerosol. Inspired by particle adhe-
sion that could be controlled by surface chemistry groups of
membranes, Yu et al. [55] studied polarity-dominated virus
capture filtering facepiece respirators. Due to the highly polar
thin-film (TF) coated on electrospun PAN nanofibrous mem-
brane (TFPNM), TFPNM always maintained N97-grade
filtration efficiency against tiny Coxsackie B4 virus (CV-B4,
27–30 nm) up to 24 filtration cycles [55] (Fig. 3c). As shown
in Fig. 3d, after filtering the CV-B4 viral aerosols for 24 h, fine
particles with sizes less than 100 nm attached to fibers could
be clearly visible. Such a facile polar-dominated approach will
guide to achieving more effective and safe personal healthcare.
2.3. The evaluation parameters of PM filtration
materials
2.3.1. Filtration efficiency (EPM)
The filtration efficiency is defined as:
C0
C1
EPM ¼  100% ð1Þ
C0
where C0 and C1 are the concentration of PM before and after
the filter, respectively [47,49]. It includes both number con-
centration (m
3) and mass concentration (mg m
3). The EPM is
one of the most key evaluation parameters for PM filters and is
related to the material structure, thickness, porosity, and
airflow velocity [49].
2.3.2. Pressure drop (DP)
The pressure drop is given as:
DP ¼ P0
P1 ð2Þ
where P0 (Pa) and P1 (Pa) are, respectively, the pressures
before and after the PM filtration. Pressure drop is often used
to evaluate the flow resistance or air permeability of filtration
materials [49]. For large filtration installations like building
ventilation systems, it represents energy consumption and
operating costs [56]. The greater the pressure drop, the larger
the fan power consumption. For small filtration device such as
face mask, DP represents breathability and personal comfort
[21,57]. The lower the pressure drop, the smaller the breathing
resistance and the more comfortable the user is.
2.3.3. Quality factor (QF)
The quality factor (QF) of filtration is defined as:

lnð1
EPM Þ
QF ¼ ð3Þ
DP
where EPM and DP refer to filtration efficiency and pressure
drop, respectively [49]. From equation (3), we can see that QF
will become larger when EPM increases or DP decreases.
However, there always exists a balance or rather contradiction
in traditional air filters: when EPM improves, DP also increases
[49]. QF is adopted to reflect the overall performance of a
filtration system or material. A larger value means that the
material has a good filtration performance.
Airflow rate plays an important role in filter performance.
Since EPM tends to decrease and DP increases when air flow
rate increases, the effect of airflow velocity is expected to be a
complex relationship. To directly incorporate the effect airflow
velocity, Choi et al. proposed a modified QF (m–QF) [4,58]:
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 677

PM2.5 PM10-2.5
(a)) (b) 1.0

Removal efficiency
0.8
0.6
N 0.4
N OH
n n n n n
0.2
(3.6 D) (2.3 D) (0.7 D) (1.2 D) (0.6 D)
PAN PVP PS PVA PP 0

C on
C VA

PP
r
P
N

PS

pe
PV
PA

b
P

op
ar
(c)) 100
cTFPNM (d)
Filtration efficiency (%)

MEO
98

96

94

92

~30 nm
90
0 5 10 15 20 25
Filtration cycle

Fig. 3. (a) Molecular model and corresponding dipole moments of the repeating units of PAN, PVP, PS, PVA, and PP. (b) Removal efficiency comparison of
different transparent air filters under the same conditions. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [53]. Copyright (2015) Springer Nature. (c) The filtration per-
formance evolution of TFPNMs and MEO-brand N95 respirators against CV-B4 virus. (d) SEM images of TFPNMs after filtering CV-B4 virus for 24 h. Reprinted
with permission from Ref. [55]. Copyright (2021) John Wiley and Sons.

For example, Buivydiene et al. [75] utilized polyamide (PA) 6/

lnð1
EPM ÞV 6 as the precursor solution. They combined solution electro-
m
QF ¼ ð4Þ spinning and melt electrospinning to obtain nano/sub-micro-
DP
meter and micrometer multi-layered fibers filter. They found
melt/solution electrospun fiber mats have higher porosity (up
3. Advanced filtration materials to 94.78%), lower DP (15.92–50.17 Pa), higher EPM (from
91.3% of PM1.0 to 98.5% of PM10), and higher QF (0.068–
In recent years, many types of advanced filtration materials, 0.085 Pa-1) than the ones by other single-step techniques.
such as synthetic and natural polymers, MOFs, and carbon- However, there are still some challenges in filtering finer
based materials have been proposed for PM capture. Their key particulate PM0.3. To overcome the challenges, Lou et al. [76]
characteristics for PM filtration are discussed in the following adopted a structural optimization strategy to form grooves on
sections. the fibers. As shown in Fig. 4a and b, the surface of poly-
ethersulfone (PES)/PAN electrospun nanofiber membranes
3.1. Polymers (ENMs) possesses a grooved structure after chloroform treat-
ment due to partial PES dissolution. These groove structures
3.1.1. Synthetic polymers improve surface roughness and contact area, which will form
Owing to low cost and easiness to be modified, petroleum- backflow when the air passes through and increase the colli-
based synthetic polymers including polyethylene (PE) and PP sion and diffusion of the particulates. The groove structure can
are often used for preparing conventional commercial air filters be adjusted by manipulating the PES content. When the mass
[59,60]. Later, many different kinds of synthetic polymers, such ratio of the PES component reaches 15% in PES/PAN
as PI [61,62], PS [63], polyurethane (PU) [64], PAN [53,65,66],
PVA [67], polyvinyl chloride (PVC) [68], PVP [69], polylactic Table 1
acid (PLA) [70], polyacrylic acid (PAA) [71], and poly- Common synthetic polymer for PM2.5 filtration.
vinylidene fluoride (PVDF) [65,66,72,73] were synthesized into Materials Particle size (mm) EPM (%) DP (Pa) QF (Pa
1) Ref.
nanofibers by electrospinning in order to produce advanced PI 2.5 99.97 73 0.1072 [61]
filtration materials for air purification purpose. Table 1 shows PS 2.5 99.99 145 0.15 [63]
the PM2.5 filtration performance of air filtration materials PU 2.5 99.73 28 0.211 [64]
PAN 2.5 96.12 133 0.024 [53]
mainly composed of common synthetic polymers. PVA 2.5 96.70 178 0.019 [67]
With the development of fiber fabrication techniques, PVP 2.5 95 101 0.029 [74]
electrospinning has become one of the most well-established PAA 2.5 99.6 146.3 0.034 [71]
and cost-effective techniques for producing micro-nano fibers. PVDF 2.5 98.16 30 0.120 [72]
678 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
Fig. 4. (a–b) SEM photographs before and after chloroform treated PES/PAN ENMs. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [76]. Copyright (2021) IOP Publishing.
(c–d) SEM images of 2D NF-net. (e) TEM images of the 2D networks and triangular junctions. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [77]. Copyright (2020) John
Wiley and Sons. (f–h) SEM images of TPU nanofiber/net. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [78]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society.
membrane, the prepared air filter presented excellent perfor-
mance with EPM up to 99.54 ± 0.11% and DP as low as
133.9 ± 1.8 Pa for PM0.3.
On the other hand, Ding's group [77] adopts a morphology
optimization strategy inspired by spider web to solve the
filtration problem of fine particles PM0.3. In the first step,
PVDF and dodecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (DTAB)
were prepared into precursor solutions. The spider-web-
inspired network generator (SWING) technique was applied to
produce 2D nanostructured fibrous networks (NF-nets), which
can apply to self-sustained electrostatic air filters (Fig. 4c–e).
The 2D SWING NF-nets are primarily derived from droplet
ejection and deformation/phase separation, self-charging
piezoelectric b-phase PVDF via aeolian vibration. These
unique properties and 2D net topography enable the SWING
air filters to exhibit excellent self-sustained long-range elec-
trostatic adhesion. As a result, high filtration efficiency with
EPM > 99.995% for PM0.3, low air resistance with DP
< 88.5 Pa namely only < 0.09% of atmosphere pressure, and
high transparency > 82% were realized. Enlightened by Ding's
work, Chen and Zhang et al. [78] developed a novel electro-
spinning/netting technique for the filtration of ultrafine PM0.1.
As the addition of Li þ ions enhanced the solution conduc-
tivity and rapid phase separation, they could controllably
fabricate of thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) nanofiber/net
structure (Fig. 4f–h). With the content of Liþ ions incorpo-
rated in the electrospun solution increased, the filtration effi-
ciency first increased and then decreased. When the Liþ ions
concentration is 20 g L
1 and the airflow velocity is
1.0 L min
1, the TPU nanofiber/net-based filter displayed a
high EPM of 97.08% for PM0.1, a low DP of 58 Pa, and a good
QF of 0.061 Pa
1 with only 6 g m
2 base weigh.
In recent years, the photocatalytic effect was also introduced
in the field of PM removal. For instance, Zhang and his co-
workers [79] used PVP and tetra butyl titanate (TBOT) as main
components for electrospinning precursor solutions. The pre-
cursor solution was used to prepare TBOT/PVP nanofibrous
membrane (NFM) through the electrospinning technique. After
which, the TBOT/PVP NFM was calcined in the tube furnace to
obtain TiO2/carbon NFM. As shown in Fig. 5, the TiO2/carbon
NFM under UV–vis light irradiation displayed an enhanced
EPM for fine particles PM1.0 and PM0.3 (i.e., EPM of PM1.0
increased from 98.26% to 99.62% and EPM of PM0.3 increased
from 61.59% to 92.98%). This is due to the multilevel elec-
trostatic fields composed of the Schottky-junction interfacial
charge-polarization field induced by the TiO2 NPs on carbon
NFs and the photoinduced charge-polarization field resulting
from the time kinetics difference between the charge separation
and recombination processes of TiO2 NPs. Meanwhile, the as-
captured PM on the TiO2/carbon NFM can be in-situ photo-
catalytic decomposition, and some carbonaceous PM could be
decomposed into useful fuels such as CH4 and CO by multi-
step photochemical reaction.
3.1.2. Natural polymers
Unlike synthetic polymers, natural polymers refer to raw
materials derived from primary substances extracted from the
biomass that are either naturally produced or synthesized
polymers created by biomass process [43]. Natural polymers
used for PM removal mainly include cellulose, zein, silk
fibroin, chitosan (CS), soy protein isolate. Because most of
them possess excellent biocompatibility, good biodegrad-
ability, and are environmentally friendly, a growing number of
research works have been focused on natural polymers and
their derivatives in recent years.
Along this line, Xiong et al. [80] and Xie et al. [52]
fabricated hierarchically porous structures of corrugated paper
frame cellulose nanofibril (CNF) air filter and freestanding
molybdenum disulfide (MoS2)@carbonized cellulose aerogel
air purifier. The former could be optimized via altering prep-
aration parameters like the CNFs size, freezing temperature,
concentration, base weight, etc. At the CNF concentration is
0.05 wt%, it could self-assemble to well-dispersed fibril net-
works, and the as-obtained CNF/corrugated paper air filters
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 679

Fig. 5. (a–b) EPM (%) of fine PM before and after UV–vis light irradiation for (a) pure carbon NFM (blue bar) and (b) TiO2/carbon NFM (red bar). (c) Schematic of
space-charge polarizations induced multilevel electrostatic fields in the interface of metal/semiconductor Schottky-junction of TiO2/carbon NF. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [79]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.

showed a high EPM of 94.6% for PM0.3 removal, relatively low
DP of 174.2 Pa, and QF of 0.0168 Pa
1. In the latter example,
sheet MoS2 was vertically grown on the carbonized cellulose
aerogel (CCA) surface via a hydrothermal method. The high
specific surface area and the strong surface charge accumu-
lation have created a strong electrostatic force between the air
filter and PM particulates under an applied electrostatic field.
Accordingly, the filtration efficiency of PM2.5 and PM10 was
over 99.91% and 99.95%, respectively. After 5 cycles, the
removal efficiency was still maintained at 97.80%, and the
regeneration of the filter can be simply realized by washing
using deionized water.
In addition, Tian et al. [81] found natural proteins, such as
soy protein, gelatin, and zein that contained abundant func-
tional groups, which might promote strong interactions with
PM and had huge potential in PM filtration. However, among
them, only zein-based nanofibers show a high PM filtration
performance and a better moisture resistance. The other nat-
ural proteins are quite susceptible to moisture, leading to the
decay of electrostatic forces, which limits their application in
air purification. For these reasons, They [82] synthesized zein
nanofibers with good mechanical properties and moisture
resistance via electrospinning with the assistance of polyvinyl
alcohol, followed by cross-linking with glutaraldehyde
(Fig. 6a). The optimized nanofibers exhibited 97.3% filtration
efficiency of PM0.3, and the filtration efficiency was over 98%
for particulates size larger than 0.5 mm.
Silk fibroin and chitosan are popular natural polymer ma-
terials. The former is mainly obtained from Bombyx mori
silkworm cocoons, the latter is a saccharide that is primarily
extracted from the hard outer skeleton of shellfish, shrimp, and
other crustacean shells. They are all biocompatible, biode-
gradable, and environmentally friendly. Xie et al. [83] devel-
oped a solvent welding electrospun strategy to cross-link
lyophilized silk nanofiber (SNF) 3D networks by phenethyl
alcohol (PEA), fabricating low density and water-insoluble silk
fibroin nanofibrous aerogels (SNFAs), which could be applied
in air filtration and oil/water separation simultaneously. Hu
et al. [84] obtained natural SNFs through exfoliation from
silkworm silks fibers by a mechanical disintegration method.
680 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

Fig. 6. (a) A schematic illustrating the preparation of hydrophobic cross-linking zein nanofibers. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [82]. Copyright (2020)
Elsevier. (b–c) SEM images of (b) PU and (c) PU@ZIF film. (d) XRD patterns of ZIF-8, PU, and PU@ZIF-8. (e) The contact angle photo of PU@ZIF containing
different concentrations of ZIF-8. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [99]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (f–g) The (f) PM removal efficiency
(%) and (g) quality factor (Pa
1) of isomeric MAFs/cotton. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [100]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier.

Subsequently, adhesive PVA solution was mixed with the SNF
suspension to solidify the junctions between SNFs through their
rich inherent hydroxyl groups. A 3D nanofibrous aerogel was
obtained after freeze-drying the suspension. The as-prepared
SNF-based aerogels have controllable and stable 3D structures,
ultrahigh porosity, good PM filtration efficiency (about 98% for
PM10), and ultralow thermal conductivity (0.0263 W m
1 K
1),
which may be used for advanced filtration materials and ul-
tralight heat preservation materials. Due to some characteristics
of chitosan including strong polarity, lightweight, antibacterial
properties, non-toxic and biodegradable, Choi et al. [85]
fabricated a biodegradable, moisture-resistant, and highly
breathable fibrous mask filter. This mask displayed a compa-
rable filtration efficiency of 98.3% for PM2.5 as the commercial
N95 mask. In addition, it is very breathable (DP ~ 59 Pa) and
better in humidity management compared to the traditional N95
mask.
3.2. Porous metal–organic frameworks
Porous metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), constructed
from metal ions or clusters and organic ligands via the
coordination bonding, have attracted an increasing amount of
attention owing to their ultrahigh porosity, controllable pore
size, high thermal and chemical stability, and easiness to be
functionalized [86–93]. Up to now, researchers have explored
many methods for MOF preparation, including solvothermal,
seeded growth, microwave-assisted deposition, freeze-drying,
dip-coating, electrochemical synthesis [94–98]. Yet it is worth
noting that MOFs could only be applied to PM filtration after
being loaded on certain substrates, such as the electrospun
polymer nanofibrous membranes, cotton, and graphene aerogel.
Wang et al. [99], using PU as the substrate, prepared
PU@Zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIF)-15 fiber membrane
by direct blending and electrospinning method. As shown in
Fig. 6b and c, the surface of the PU fibers appears rougher after
loading ZIF. X-ray diffraction (XRD) in Fig. 6d confirms the
presence of ZIF in the PU/ZIF samples. The authors have also
characterized the hydrophobicity of samples by measuring the
water contact angle (WCA). As shown in Fig. 6e, due to the
increase in surface roughness, the contact angle increased after
loading ZIF onto PU, indicating the water resistance has
significantly improved. The prepared PU@ZIF-15 nanofiber
membranes exhibited excellent mechanical performance
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
(tensile strength 10.38 MPa), water repellency
(WCA ~ 128.63 ), high EPM (97.99 ± 2.0%) of PM2.5. At the
same time, due to the good mechanical properties and water
resistance, the membrane also exhibited superior stability and
reusability with water washing.
Jhung et al. [100,101] carried out two studies on MOFs
coated on the cotton substrate. In one of the studies, ionic salts
(ISs) such as CaCl2 and LiCl were loaded onto highly porous
MOFs (UiO-67 or MIL-101) by the impregnation method
[101]. Subsequently, the modified MOFs were coated onto a
cotton substrate. EPM and QF were found in the order of
CaCl2(20)@MIL-101/cotton > LiCl(20)@MIL-101/cotton >
CaCl2(20)@UiO-67/cotton > LiCl(20)@UiO-67/cotton. The
reason is that the MIL-101 has a higher porosity than UiO-67,
and CaCl2(Ca2þ) has a larger permanent charge separation
compared to LiCl (Liþ). Since permanent charge separation of
ionic salts increase the electrostatic interactions with PMs, the
high porosity ISs@MOFs display the highest QF of
0.085 Pa
1. In the other research by this group of authors,
three isomeric MOFs, namely MAF-5, MAF-6, and MAF-32,
were coated on a cotton substrate to investigate the influence
of voidage on PM removal efficiency [100]. As displayed in
Fig. 6f and g, the EPM and QF linearly increased with
improving voidage of the isomeric MAFs on cotton.
In a separate work, Mao et al. [102] constructed a high-
performance PM filter by decorating ZIF-67 uniformly on a
3D porous network of reduced graphene oxide aerogel (rGA)
substrate. Due to the continuous 3D networks, high specific
surface area, and numerous active sites, the ZIF-67/rGA
possessed a filtration efficiency of more than 98.1% in 100 h
static test, dynamic filtration of PM2.5 > 97.8%, and PM10 >
98.2%. What's more, the ZIF-67/rGA after PM capture could
be converted to Co3O4 loaded on nitrogen-doped rGA (Co3O4/
N-rGA) by in-situ carbonization and activation in a pyrolysis
process. The obtained Co3O4/N-rGA exhibited unprecedented
electrochemical performance and had exceeded the Co3O4/r-
GA obtained by converting ZIF-67/r-GA without PM loading.
Therefore, the as-prepared material can be used not only for
PM removal but also for high-performance energy storage and
conversion after the pyrolysis conversion.
3.3. Carbon-based materials
Carbon-based materials have been widely used in many
fields. Among them, activated carbon is often applied to air
filtration to remove SOx, NOx, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and other exhaust gases, owing to their numerous
active adsorption sites, high specific surface area, and porosity
[103–105]. In recent years, other carbon-based materials, such
as carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and graphene oxide (GO) have
emerged as strong candidates for a wide range of applications
including PM filtration.
Zhong's group [106] proposed a novel strategy by in situ
growing one-dimensional (1D) CNTs on a porous SiC mem-
brane substrate via chemical vapor deposition (CVD) without
introducing a transition or sacrificial layer. Three steric con-
figurations involving spiral CNTs-coated SiC membrane
681
(S-CNTs/SiC), interweaving CNTs/SiC membrane (I-CNTs/
SiC) and vertical CNTs/SiC membrane (V-CNTs/SiC)
were controllably prepared. Among these, the S-CNTs/SiC
exhibited excellent performance with gas permeance of
450 m3 m
2 h
1 kPa
1 and ultrafine PM filtration efficiency of
99.48%.
GO is derived from graphene with rich surface oxygen-
containing functional groups, large specific surface area, low
density, good mechanical properties, and electrical conduc-
tivity. GO can be used either directly for air filters or indirectly
through decorating onto other filter materials. Lai's group [51]
fabricated graphene aerogel (GA) via solvothermal reaction
and freeze-drying. Subsequently, a novel charged graphene
aerogel filter (CGAF) was created by applying an external
electrical field through an inserted conductor. Since the CGAF
carries electrical charges, it has achieved a high filtration ef-
ficiency while maintaining a low pressure drop. The filtration
efficiency is above 99.9% for non-oily PM2.5 and more than
99.6% for oily PM2.5 even under a very high concentration
(>10,000 mg m
3). Furthermore, it has outstanding reusability,
flame-retardancy, and stability in harsh environments. After 10
times of washing or 5 min of burning, the EPM remained
greater than 99%. Chen et al. [107] prepared the GO func-
tionalized PVDF NFMs. 2D GO nanosheets were introduced
into PVDF NFMs via blending-electrospinning of GO/PVDF
as well as GO@PVDF dip-coating to prepare a different
composite NFMs air filter. Due to the functionalization of GO,
the as-prepared samples displayed good mechanical strength,
reusability, and enhanced filtration performance. The PM2.5
removal efficiency of NFMs is as follows: GO/PVDF NFMs
(99.31%) > GO@PVDF NFMs (95.41%) > pristine PVDF
NFMs (93.74%).
3.4. Other materials
Other materials, such as inorganic nanofibers and metal
nanowires, have also been used for PM removal applications.
Inorganic compounds possess prominent thermal and chemical
stability, which makes them particularly useful for harsh
environment applications [108–110]. Various types of oxides,
carbides, nitrides have been explored, including SiO2 [111],
Al2O3 [112], SiC [113–115], and Si3N4 [116].
As an example, Li et al. [116] synthesized a highly porous
Si3N4 nanofiber sponge (NFS) air filter via CVD. Its fibers
aligned along the airflow direction, which has resulted in
stagnation of PM under the friction force when they sliding
along the fiber direction. Such structure decreases the pore
blocking and pressure drop. As a result, the as-prepared Si3N4
NFS showed a very high filtration efficiency of 99.97% for
PM2.5, a low pressure drop at 340 Pa (only <0.33% of atmo-
spheric pressure), and a high airflow rate of 8.72 m s
1 when
tested at 1000  C.
In 2017, Ko et al. [117] first exhibited the use of an Ag
nanowire percolation network to capture PM2.5. The air filter
exhibited high filtration efficiency (>99.99%) for PM2.5 under
low working voltage condition (<5 V), and is reusable and
transparent. Recently, Liu et al. [118] fabricated metallic copper
682 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

nanowire foams using electrodeposition, freeze-drying, and
sintering processes. The foams are mechanically sturdy and
possess a large specific surface area and low density (~2 to 30%
of the bulk metals). The foams displayed a filtration efficiency
of over 96.6% for PM0.3, and are easy to clean for reuse.
4. Additional functions
With the continuous development of air filters towards
practical applications, more and more additional functions
have been suggested to satisfy the multifunctional re-
quirements in practical problems encountered by the industry.
Considerations for high thermal stability, antibacterial activity,
and special wettability are often among these additional
functions.
4.1. Thermal stability
Thermal stability refers to the ability to maintain perfor-
mance under high temperatures. It is very important in
purifying some high-temperature waste exhaust, such as in-
dustrial emissions (140–300  C) and vehicle exhaust (30–
80  C) [119,120].
PI is one of the most commonly used heat-resisting poly-
mer fibers with excellent mechanical properties, prominent
chemical and thermal stability [121,122]. Xie et al. [123]
fabricated a wrinkled porous structured PI nanofiber air filter
using PAN as the template via electrospinning and subsequent
thermal-induced phase separation. The filter showed
outstanding properties, with the PM0.3 filtration efficiency of
95.55%, the pressure drop of 38.52 Pa, and the quality factor
of 0.0808 Pa
1 at 280  C. Qiao et al. [124] prepared a PI
nanofiber (PINF) aerogel using water as the dispersant and
triethylamine (TEA) as the binder (Fig. 7a). Ice templating and
thermal imidization were applied to generate the aerogel.
According to the thermogravimetric analysis (Fig. 7b and c),
the resultant PINF aerogel could withstand a high temperature
of 300  C while maintaining a high removal efficiency for
PM2.5 (99.83%). Lu et al. [125] prepared a hybrid air filter
using PI through electrospinning and subsequently multiple

Fig. 7. (a) The schematics of preparation processes of PINF aerogel. (b) TG and DTG curves of PINF aerogel sample. (c) The variations in the storage modulus
(E0 ), loss modulus (E00 ), and damping ratio of the sample at 25–300  C. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [124]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier. (d–e) The removal
efficiency of (d) PI filter, (e) PI-POSS@ZIF filter at 25  C and 280  C, respectively. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [125]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier. (f) TGA
curves of corresponding samples (g) EPM and DP of the as-prepared sample after different temperature treatment. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [127].
Copyright (2020) Elsevier.
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
hydrogen bonding self-assembly. In their work, octa(amino-
propylsilsesquioxane) (POSS–NH2) was utilized to activate
the PI nanofiber surface, and then amino-functionalized
zeolitic imidazolate framework-8 (NH2-ZIF-8) nanocrystals
were anchored on the active fiber surface by hydrogen
bonding. The as-prepared PI-POSS@ZIF hybrid filter exhibi-
ted a high PM0.3 filtration efficiency of 99.28% (Fig. 7d, e), a
low pressure drop of 49.21 Pa, a high quality factor of
0.1002 Pa
1 (2.74 times than PI filter of 0.0366 Pa
1) at
280  C.
Other novel composite nanofibrous membranes were also
exploited for use in a high-temperature environment. For
example, Zhang et al. [126] used spinnable PAN and high-
performance poly(m-phenylene isophthalamide) (PMIA) to
prepare high-temperature resistant PMIA/PAN composite
nanofibers membrane by optimizing the mass ratio of the two-
component solutions. After a series of heating tests at 140–
220  C, the filtration efficiency of the PMIA/PAN
was maintained at over 99% for PM0.3 at all times. Further-
more, Yang et al. [127] developed a novel multifunctional
composite nanofiber membrane by introducing BaTiO3 during
the spinning of PU and polysulfonamide (PSA) fibers. As a
result of the cooperation of PU, PSA, and BaTiO3, the
BaTiO3@PU/PSA nanofiber membrane achieved a high EPM
of 99.99% for fine particles PM2.5 with a low DP of
39.4 ± 0.2 Pa. As is shown in Fig. 7f and g, its physical sta-
bility and EPM were well preserved under heating up to
300  C.
4.2. Antibacterial property
Faced with several major pandemics, for example, the
highly infectious COVID-19, the Middle East respiratory
syndrome (MERS), and the severe acute respiratory syndrome
(SARS) [128], a lot of attention has been paid to the filtration
of bioaerosols and the antibacterial performance of air filters.
Here, we summarize three groups of antimicrobial materials,
viz., nano-metallic materials, photocatalysts, and other
materials.
4.2.1. Nano-metallic materials
Metallic materials are commonly used for antibacterial
purposes, involving silver (Ag), copper (Cu), titanium (Ti),
aluminum (Al), zinc (Zn). Among them, Ag nanoparticles (Ag
NPs) are the most frequently used because of their outstanding
and broad-spectrum antibacterial property. The antibacterial
mechanism of Ag NPs is to denature the phospholipids and
proteins of microorganism's cell wall, destroy the integrity of
the cells and inhibit bacterial growth [129]. For instance, Ju
et al. [130] anchored Ag NPs on polyamide-6 electrospun
nanofibers through hydrogen-bond to obtain bumpy nanorough
structure surface as well as the strong antibacterial ability and
antiviral property. Constructing the bumpy rough surface is an
effective strategy to facilitate particles stagnation, thereby
enhancing filtration performance (EPM ~ 99.99% and
DP ~ 31 Pa for PM2.5). Due to the existence of Ag NPs, the as-
prepared membrane exhibited excellent antibacterial ability
683
against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus and good
antiviral property against Porcine Deltacoronavirus (PDCoV)
which is a positive-sense RNA virus and typical Coronavi-
ruses. Xiao et al. [131] prepared nanoscale Ag NPs via the
liquid phase reduction method and used them to generate tree-
like Ag NPs/PVDF nanofibers by electrospinning the particle-
containing solution. The Ag NPs/PVDF nanofibrous mem-
branes were kept at a high level (99.95–99.97%) of filtration
efficiency, with the bacterial reduction rates (BR) greater than
99.6% value for E. coli (E. coli) and S. aureus (S. aureus). Fan
et al. [132] fabricated a novel tug-of-war-inspired bio-based
multifunctional air filter with antimicrobial activity. They first
anchored Ag NPs on paper towel (PT) microfibers (Ag@PT)
by in situ reduction. Subsequently, aligned zein nanofibers
(zNFs) were prepared as the upper layer by electrospinning
protein Pickering emulsion (a stable emulsion, here formu-
lated with cellulose nanofibril suspension and zein solution)
[132,133]. Ultimately, the zNFs-Ag@PT air filter was ob-
tained. Candida albicans (yeast), Micrococcus luteus (Gram-
positive bacteria), and E. coli (Gram-negative bacteria) were
selected to characterize broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity.
The results showed that the inhibition zones in the zNFs-
Ag@PT plate were clearly visible and demonstrated excellent
antibacterial properties. The diameters of the inhibition zones
were about 2.18 cm for M. luteus, 1.85 cm for E. coli, and
1.70 cm for C. albicans, respectively for the 3 bacteria
(Fig. 8a). Furthermore, the filter also showed excellent particle
filtration performance (99.30% for PM0.3).
A washable antibacterial polyester/aluminum (PET/Al) air
filter was prepared by Choi et al. [134] During the test, a
voltage of
10 kV and þ10 kV was applied to the ionizer and
PET/Al, respectively. The average capture efficiency of
charged E. coli cells (Gram-negative bacteria) significantly
improved to about 99.99% via electrostatic forces (Fig. 8b).
As the Al deposition time added from 5 min to 180 min, the
bacterial inactivation efficiency improved to 96.9 ± 0.59%
against Staphylococcus epidermidis (Gram-positive bacteria)
and 94.8 ± 1.18% against E. coli (Gram-negative bacteria)
(Fig. 8c and d). On the one hand, this is because the enhanced
nano-rough surface of PET/Al could impede bacteria pre-
liminary adhesion, and consequently lead to cell apoptosis. On
the other hand, in addition to the physical mechanism,
chemical reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated from Al
oxides may also play a key role in disrupting the cell walls.
In a separate effort, Jang et al. [135] prepared PVDF
multifunctional nanofiber (MNF) containing well-dispersed
MOF-801 and Cu2O NPs via a facile electrospinning process.
Due to the physical blockage and cell wall destruction by
Cu2O NPs, the MOF-801@PVDF MNFs possessed good
antimicrobial efficacy against Gram-positive (S. aureus) and
Gram-negative (E. coli) bacteria (Fig. 8e). In the same year,
Victor et al. [136] adopted titanium nanotubes (TNT) as the
main antibacterial active ingredient to synthesis electrospun
PVDF nanofiber. It showed the highest bacterial filtration ef-
ficiency of 99.88% when electrospinning time was 3 h and
TNT filler was 15 wt%. From the inhibition zone tests in
Fig. 8f, the increasing concentration of TNT enhanced the
684 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

Fig. 8. (a) Photographs of inhibition zone of zNFs-Ag@PT. (From left to right: M. luteus, E. coli, and C. albicans). Reprinted with permission from Ref. [132].
Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (b) The capture efficiency (%) of PET/Al-180 for different sizes of charged E. coli. (c) The inactivation efficiency
(%) against E. coli and S. epidermidis for PET/Al samples under various Al deposition times. (d) Photographs of recultivated E. coli and S. epidermidis colonies
were sampled from raw PET, PET/Al-15, and PET/Al-180 filters, respectively. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [134]. Copyright (2018) Elsevier. (e)
Antibacterial tests against for E. coli a) control group, b) Cu2O/MOF-801@PVDF MNF; Antibacterial tests against S. aureus c) control group, d) Cu2O/MOF-
801@PVDF MNF. Insets: corresponding SEM images. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [135]. Copyright (2021) Royal Society of Chemistry. (f) Inhibition
zone test of samples against a) E. coli and b) S. aureus. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [136]. Copyright (2021) Springer Nature.

antibacterial activity. This is because TNT can bind with the
negatively charged bacterial cell wall and rupture the cell wall.
4.2.2. Photocatalysts
Photocatalytic effect can be utilized for antibacterial ap-
plications, in which strong germicidal ROS are produced upon
light irradiation on a semiconductor surface. The following
section will explain ZnO, TiO2-based, MOF-based materials,
and so on.
Zhong's group [137] hydrothermally synthesized 1D ZnO
nanorods (NRs) on the surface of a 3D porous expanded
polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) matrix. The prepared air fil-
ters have outstanding performance with filtration efficiency
greater than 99.9999%, sterilization rate against both Gram-
negative bacterium (E. coli) and Gram-positive bacterium (S.
aureus) higher than 99.0%. They suggested two possible
antimicrobial mechanisms. One is that Zn2þ ions bring about
the breakage of the bacterium cell wall. The other mechanism
is that ROS such as hydroxyl radicals ($OH) and/or hydrogen
peroxide (H2O2), originated from photocatalytic actions of
ZnO NRs, inhibit bacterial growth. Zhu et al. [138] fabricated
nitrogen-doped TiO2 (N-TiO2) and TiO2 mixture to prepare
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 685

Fig. 9. (a) The sterilization mechanism of N–TiO2 photocatalytic antibacterial masks under visible light irradiation. (b) Photocatalytic rejuvenation tests of
prepared masks with and without sunlight irradiation. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [138]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (c) Photocatalytic
inactivation efficiency and PM removal efficiency of MOFilter. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [141]. Copyright (2019) Springer Nature.

photocatalytic antibacterial masks. Since nitrogen doping into
TiO2 has increased the light absorption range into the visible
light range, more bactericidal free radicals of HO$ and $O2

will be generated (Fig. 9a). The as-prepared N-TiO2/TiO2
masks revealed a 100% bacteria sterilization against E. coli K-
12 strain MG1655 and S. aureus strain HG003 under either 0.1
Sun simulator irradiation (200–2500 nm, 106 W m
2) or
natural sunlight for 10 min (Fig. 9b). Jung et al. [139] adopted
a visible-light-activated (VLA) dye sensitization strategy,
combining TiO2 NPs with a hydrophobic molecule,
1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane (PFOTES), and a
visible-light sensitizer, the crystal violet (CV) organic dye to
obtain TiO2@PFOTES-CV air filter. The CV dye has
strengthened the visible light photocatalytic activity, and
PFOTES formed a hydrophobic barrier to protect CV. With
such a design, the TiO2@PFOTES-CV filter possessed strong
photocatalytic antibacterial property under visible light with
an inactivation rate of ~99.98% and blocking efficiency of
~99.9% against various bacterium bioaerosols. Sun et al. [140]
reported a daylight-driven photo-induced antimicrobial nano-
fibrous membrane (RNM) that is green, bioprotective,
rechargeable, and antiviral. The various ROS generated under
light irradiation, including $OH, superoxide ($O2
), and
H2O2, could cause damage to DNA, RNA, lipids, and proteins,
ultimately causing the apoptosis of bacteria and viruses. The
RNM showed excellent overall performance indices, such as
above 99% removal rate for fine particulates, over 99.9999%
germicidal rate, and more than 99.999% virucidal efficacy.
With regard to MOF-based materials, Wang's group [141]
synthesized a zinc-imidazolate MOF ZIF-8, which has excel-
lent photocatalytic bactericidal activity and PM removal effi-
ciency. The inactivation efficiency was over 99.9999% against
E. coli in saline within simulated solar irradiation for 2 h and
97% PM removal efficiency (Fig. 9c). Through low-tempera-
ture electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectra and
valence band X-ray photoelectron spectra (VB-XPS) analyses,
the authors believe that the mechanism begins with the
photoelectron production through the ligand to metal charge
transfer (LMCT) process. Then the generated ROS (H2O2 and
$O
2 ) contribute to photocatalytic antibacterial action.
To enable sustained antibacterial and filtration efficacy in
dark conditions, Li et al. [142] added ZIF-8 to the melt
686 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
blowing-electrospinning process to prepare bead-on-string
hierarchical micro/nanofibrous structured photodynamic-type
composite membranes. First, they prepared the polypropylene/
poly-3-caprolactone (PP/PCL) melt-blown membranes (deno-
ted as PPCL) by the melt-blown method. Second, PPCL
membranes were immersed in the polydopamine (PDA) so-
lution to obtain PPCL@PDA melt-blown membrane. Third,
chemical grafting bis-benzophenone-type 4, 40 -terephthaloyl
diphthalic anhydride (TDPA) photosensitizer and epi-
gallocatechin gallate (EGCG) antibacterial agent to obtain
PPCL@PDA/TAEG. Finally, the mixed solution containing
PCL and ZIF-8 was electrospun over PPCL@PDA/TAEG
membranes to prepare PPCL@PDA/TAEG/PCL/ZIF8 com-
posite membranes. The as-prepared bead-on-string structured
composite membranes showed excellent filtration perfor-
mance. The PM2.5 filtration efficiency is over 99.99%, and the
antimicrobial rate against S. aureus and E. coli is 99% and
95%, respectively, in the daytime and nighttime. Because the
composite membranes can generate ROS under both light and
dark conditions, and the structure is stable. After seven light–
dark cycles, the PPCL@PDA/TAEG/PCL/ZIF8 composite
membranes still maintained the original charging capacity of
89.9% for $OH and 65.1% for H2O2.
4.2.3. Others
Other types of antibacterial materials include chitosan,
zwitterionic amphiphiles, organic biocides such as N-halamine
compounds, triclosan, and quaternary ammonium salts
[143,144]. Chitosan is a naturally available polysaccharide
extracted from chitin, and it can inhibit the growth of bacteria.
Liu et al. [145] used chitosan as the main antibacterial
ingredient to prepare transparent multilayered nanofibrous
poly(methylmethacrylate)/polydimethylsiloxane (PMMA/
PDMS) antibacterial air filters. The filter has displayed a high
antibacterial efficiency of 96.5% for E. coli and 95.2% for S.
aureus with a high filtration efficiency of 98.23 for PM2.5.
Zhang et al. [146] employed chitosan and N-halamine as
antimicrobial active substances. They prepared a multilayer
PVA/P(ADMH-NVF) nanofibrous PM filter consisting of N-
Vinylformamide (NVF), 3-allyl-5,5-dimethylhydantoin
(ADMH), and PVA. Through inhibition zones test, they
discovered that the PVA/P(ADMH-NVF) filter exhibited su-
perb antibacterial properties against Gram-negative bacteria E.
coli and Gram-positive bacteria S. aureus. Kumar et al. [147]
first prepared a novel antibacterial electrospun nanofibrous
material containing sulfobetaine (SB)-type zwitterionic am-
phiphiles. Their results suggest that filter inhibited above
99.9% the growth of both Gram-negative bacterium Klebsiella
pneumoniae (ATCC 4352) and Gram-positive bacterium S.
aureus (ATCC 6538) with a high filtration efficiency
(>99.9%). In another attempt, N-halamine and quaternary
ammonia salt (QAS) groups through covalent integration were
introduced into nanofiber membranes by Ding's group [148].
The resulting membranes realized excellent bactericidal effi-
ciency (>99.9999%) against E. coli and S. aureus., superior
virucidal efficiency (>99.999%) against E. coli phage, and
high bacteria filtration efficiency (99.77%).
4.3. Special wettability
Special wettability usually refers to extreme wetting states
such as superhydrophobicity and superhydrophilicity [149].
Superhydrophobicity is manifested through a liquid droplet
that exhibits water contact angle greater than 150 from a
macroscopic view, while superhydrophilicity refers to the case
that water contact angle is less than 5 . Wetting state impacts
the performance of filter materials as will be elaborated below.
4.3.1. Superhydrophobicity
Superhydrophobicity endows filtration materials with some
advantages including self-cleaning, resistance to moisture,
reuse after washing, and improved water vapor transmission.
Inspired by self-cleaning natural adsorptive leaves, Kang et al.
[150] coated nanoporous organic networks (NONs) on nano-
structured polyurethane acrylate (N-PUA) films (denoted as N-
PUA-NONs). As shown in Fig. 10a, from N-PUA film to N-
PUA-NON-2 film, the surface of the film became slightly
bumpy and the WCA from 75 increased to 150 . As a result,
the hydrophilic N-PUA film was converted to a super-
hydrophobic surface with enhanced capture performance to-
ward PM and washing recyclability. Li et al. [151,152]
exploited conjugated microporous polymer bearing amino-
pyridine moiety (A-CMPs) and thiophene-based conjugated
microporous polymer (T-CMP). As depicted in Fig. 10b and c,
the WCA of A-CMPs aerogels (A-CMPAs) reached 155 ,
which has severe advantages in antifouling, and filtrating par-
ticulates (99.307% for PM0.3) under high humidity air (relative
humidity (RH): 89 ± 3%). Similarly, as displayed in Fig. 10d
and e, the WCA of T-CMP-1 and T-CMP-2 were 154 and 152 ,
respectively, and their filtration efficiency in a moist environ-
ment (RH: 90 ± 5%) was all in the high end of 99–100% range
for PM0.3, PM2.5, and PM10. Liu et al. [153] utilized methyl-
trimethoxysilane (MTMS) for silanization hydrophobic modi-
fication of cellulose nanofibers (CNFs). Subsequently, the
samples were freeze-dried to produce a porous aerogel air filter
with excellent superhydrophobicity (WCA ¼ 154.2 ). A high
removal efficiency above 99% was reported for the size greater
than 0.5 mm of particulate matter (Fig. 10f and g).
4.3.2. Superhydrophilicity
Hydrophilic polar functional groups on polymeric materials
can proactively capture ultrafine particulate matter through
chemical interactions [58,154]. Since a large amount of water
vapor exhaled from the mouth and nose during breathing may
condense and block the membrane pores, further increase DP
and affect the wearer's thermal-physiological comfort
[155,156]. Therefore, in recent years, gradient structures, from
hydrophobic to superhydrophilic state, have been explored for
their high moisture-vapor transmission rate (MVTR). For
example, Ding et al. [155] designed a hydrophobic to super-
hydrophilic gradient structure by adopting electrospun super-
hydrophilic PAN/SiO2 nanofibers as moisture-vapor transfer
vectors and hydrophobic PVDF nanofibers as water-repellent
components (Fig. 11a). The resultant membranes displayed a
steady filtration efficiency of 99.99% for PM2.5, a low pressure
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 687

Fig. 10. (a) SEM images and corresponding WCA images of N-PUA and N-PUA-NON-2. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [150]. Copyright (2019) American
Chemical Society. (b) Simulated demonstration device for the PM capture of the A-CMPAs filter under high humidity conditions. Inset demonstrates the
photograph of the water contact angle of A-CMPAs, and photo of A-CMPAs filter. (c) The schematic illustration of A-CMPAs for PM filtration in high humidity
conditions. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [151]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier. (d) PM removal efficiency of T-CMP-1 filter under various times (RH:
90 ± 5%). (e) The images of water/oil contact angle for T-CMP. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [152]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (f) The
digital images of the water contact angle of the surface and cross section. (g) The filtration efficiency of samples. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [153].
Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society.

drop of 86 Pa, and a high MVTR of 13,612 g m
2 d
1. Wang
et al. [156] developed a new type of polymer/MOF-derived
multilayer membranes, which consisted of a superhydrophilic
PAN fiber outer layer with multiscale surface roughness
(direct exposure to polluted air), a hydrophilic composite in-
termediate layer containing alternating layers of PAN nano-
fibers and PAN-ZIF-8 microfibers, and the hydrophobic PS
fiber mat as an inner layer (Fig. 11b). The resultant hydro-
philic to hydrophobic gradient structure possessed good
moisture absorption capability and high MVTR of
10,560 g m
2 d
1 owing to strong capillary force and push–
pull effect. More importantly, benefiting from the large spe-
cific surface area, hierarchical porous structure, and high
porosity as well as the multiscale surface roughness of the
fibers, the membrane exhibited a high EPM of 99.973% for
PM0.3 at a low DP of 80.1 Pa. Fig. 11c demonstrates the
apparent water contact angles of superhydrophilic side in
different alkali treatment times. In addition, a TiO2/H2O2
photocatalysis approach was adopted to improve hydrophi-
licity by Li et al. [157], as is shown in Fig. 11d; the contact
angle for this non-woven fabric (NWF) sharply decreased
from 112 at the pristine state to nearly 0 after the surface
TiO2/H2O2 modification.
4.3.3. Janus membrane
Janus membrane displays different wettability on each
side, which can be used for directional transportation of
liquids. Hydrophobic materials can make the exhaled vapor
condense into small droplets, and hydrophilic materials can
absorb the condensed water. Xu et al. [158] prepared three
types of Janus nanofibrous porous membranes containing b-
cyclodextrin (b-CD) by electrospinning (Fig. 12a). Among
them, the PAN/b-CD/PCL/ZnO Janus membrane showed the
best filtration performance, with a filtration efficiency of up
to 99.99% and a pressure drop of 156.5 Pa. More importantly,
the water vapor or condensed water droplets could be
688 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

PM2.5 pollutant
(a) Low surface energy (b)

Super-hydrophilic
hydroPAN-ZIF-8-20

Polarity
Multi-layer
PVDF (hydrophobic) PAN (hydrophilic) composite

PAN-SiO2-2
Hydrophilic
nanofibers HydroPAN-ZIF-8-1/HydroPAN
Multi-layer
PVDF/ composite
PAN-SiO2-2
nanofibers

PVDF Gradient composite Moisture

nanofibers fibrous membranes Hydrophobic PS

(c) (d)
PAN-ZIF-8

0s 20 s 40 s 80 s 120 s 160 s 180

Pristine NWF
150
1 min

Initial 0.5 s 1s 3s 5s 8s
120

WCA (°)
Initial 0.25 s 0.5 s 0.75 s 1.25 s 1.75 s
5 min

90

60
20 min 10 min

Initial 0.17 s 0.25 s 0.5 s 0.75 s 1s

Modified NWF
30
Initial 0.17 s 0.25 s 0.5 s 0.67 s 0.75 s
0

Fig. 11. (a) Schematics illustrate a molecular model of main components and the fabrication process of gradient composite membranes. Reprinted with permission
from Ref. [155]. Copyright (2017) John Wiley and Sons. (b) The schematic of preparing gradient multilayer composite membranes. (c) Superhydrophilic side
apparent water contact angles of multilayer membranes in different alkali treatment times. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [156]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.
(d) WCA of the pristine and modified NWF. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [157]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.

directionally transported to the outside of the nanofiber mask
to reduce the damp feeling of the wearer. The contact angle
of the hydrophilic side and hydrophobic side are shown in
Fig. 12b. Park et al. [159] reported a simple and economical
strategy to prepare a high-performance Janus air filter (JAF)
by employing ubiquitous materials such as a sponge or cotton
fabric. As displayed in Fig. 12c, the average WCA of the
hydrophilic cotton is 0 , while it is 138 on the hydrophobic
cotton/CS/PDMS. At the optimized ratio of hydrophilic
(75%) to hydrophobic (25%) components, the as-prepared
filter was able to maintain a long-term filtration performance
of 99.99% even after 30 cycles and a low pressure drop of
152 Pa. Besides, Choi et al. [85] fabricated a highly breath-
able, biodegradable, wetproof, and high-efficiency mask via
applying poly(butylene succinate)-based (PBS-based) mi-
crofiber and nanofiber mats integrated into a Janus membrane
with chitosan nanowhiskers coating.
5. Applications
The development of particulate matter filtration technology
has made it possible various kinds of air filters to be developed
and optimized in recent years. In the review, we will introduce
them according to two broad categories: end-of-pipe treatment
(personal protection) and source control (engineering
facilities).
5.1. End-of-pipe treatment – personal protection
5.1.1. Face mask
Face mask provides significant protection to individuals,
especially in a high-risk environment or during an epidemic
time [160]. The commonly used fabrics for respiratory masks
include cotton with different thread counts, silk, flannel,
chiffon, woven, nonwoven, blended fabrics, various synthetic
fabrics, and their recombination [161–165]. There are many
different types of face masks, among them, medical face
masks and N95 respirators are most commonly used during the
current COVID-19 pandemic.
Recently, numerous novel functional masks and preparative
technology have emerged, such as electrical heating antibac-
terial mask (Fig. 13a) [166], photothermal disinfection face
mask (Fig. 13b) [167,168], embossed structural facemask via
combining 3D printing membranes technology and electro-
spinning method [169], all-polymer hybrid electret fibrous
respirator (Fig. 13c) [170], environmentally friendly PVA-
tannic acid (TA) nanofiber composite mask (Fig. 13d) [171].
Furthermore, the researchers also developed a series of real-
time respiratory monitoring facial masks. For example, Lee
et al. [172] prepared PAN nanofibrous membranes by elec-
trospinning first and then coated conductive MOF (Ni-CAT-1)
on the nanofiber via a two-step hydrothermal reaction. The as-
prepared hybrid membrane mask realized respiratory
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 689

Fig. 12. (a) Schematic diagram of b-CD-containing Janus NFMs prepared through electrospinning. (b) Optical images, and photos of hydrophilic side and hy-
drophobic side of three types of Janus membranes: PAN/b-CD/PCL/ZnO, PAN/b-CD/11% PCL/2% PCL, and PAN/b-CD/mask, respectively. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [158]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (c) Photograph of JAF samples. Insets: WCAs of cotton and cotton/CS/PDMS.
Reprinted with permission from Ref. [159]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier.

monitoring function based on monitoring electrical resistance
change with the relative humidity. The mask has also reached
a good removal efficiency (>99%) (Fig. 13e). As shown in
Fig. 13f, Ding et al. [173] constructed a super-elastic hard
carbon aerogel (s-HCA)/zein composite nanofibrils facemask
equipped with real-time respiratory monitoring. The prepared
facemasks can not only achieve a high filtration efficiency of
99.5%, but also monitor human health by sensitively detecting
breath signals. In addition, Wang et al. [174] reported a green
dual function gelatin/b-cyclodextrin composite nanofiber
respirator, which can filtrate both PM and VOCs. This study
provides a solution for the development of green bi-functional
masks at low resistance.
5.1.2. Smart transparent window
Since Cui et al. [53] pioneered the concept of a transparent
air filter for windows, the optical transmittance of filters in
certain applications has been of great attention. Optical
transparency is the ratio of transmitted luminous flux to inci-
dent luminous flux. It measures the degree of light trans-
mittance through an air filter. Traditional PM filters do not
have to consider light transmission, so they are usually non-
transparent. To enable optical transmittance for filters in some
applications, Cui et al. [53] prepared electrospun nanofibers
window mesh for indoor air purification based on the natural
passive ventilation principle. Since then, the high optical
transparency to natural light also become a crucial evaluation
parameter for the types of air filters that require light trans-
mission [175].
For example, Cui et al. [176] reported direct blow-spinning
nanofibers onto window screens, which has 80% optical
transparency and over 99% filtration efficiency of PM2.5
(Fig. 14a). Ding's group [177] reported a multifunctional self-
assembled ultralight nanonetworks air filter with a low thick-
ness (~350 nm), high transparency (~95.0%), and high effi-
ciency (>99.6%) for PM2.5 (Fig. 14b). Lai's group [145]
reported an antibacterial, moisture-resistant, and transparent
nanofiber superhydrophobic filter, which has achieved more
than 96% removal efficiency for PM2.5 at optical transmittance
of 86% (Fig. 14c). In recent years, Huang et al. [178] fabri-
cated a flexible and transparent composite PVA-sodium
lignosulfonate (LS) nanofibrous membrane via green electro-
spinning and eco-friendly thermal crosslinking method.
Remarkably, the preparation process of the PVA-LS filter did
not need any organic solvent during preparation. The filter has
shown excellent performance with a low pressure drop of
24.5 Pa, high transparency of 78%, good filtration efficiency of
99% for PM2.5 (Fig. 14d). Li et al. [179] developed air-
permeable, transparent, anti-smog, and naturally ventilated
window screens by electrospinning for PET. As shown in
Fig. 14e, the PET nanofiber screen exhibited nearly the same
transmittance compared with no window screen. Liu et al.
[180] prepared PVDF/Fe3O4 composite electrospun nanofiber
membrane that exhibits magnetic and electret effects. The
690 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

Fig. 13. (a) Infrared image of the electrical heating antibacterial mask under applying a low voltage of 3 V. The inset shows a real snapshot. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [166]. Copyright (2021) American Chemical Society. (b) Digital photograph of photothermal disinfection face mask. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [167]. Copyright (2020) American Chemical Society. (c) The photo of the N95 respirator adopting all-polymer hybrid electret PS/PVDF-2
fibers as the core material. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [170]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier. (d) The exhibition of PVA-TA nanofiber mask. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [171]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier. (e) The schematic diagram of respiratory monitoring and blocking PMs face mask. Reprinted with
permission from Ref. [172]. Copyright (2020) American Chemical Society. (f) The schematic illustration of s-HCA/zein nanofibril composite respiratory
monitoring facial mask. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [173]. Copyright (2021) Royal Society of Chemistry.

prepared window screen could reach around 65% trans-
parency, EPM of 99.95%, and DP of 58.5 Pa for PM0.3 filtration
(Fig. 14f).
5.1.3. Indoor air purifier
Indoor air purifier is a common air filtration protection
device for home or office use. Chen et al. [181] designed a
thermoplastic TPU/PS/PA-6 multilevel structured composite
nanofibrous membrane by electrospinning. Due to the com-
bined electrostatic and physical sieving actions, the TPU/PS/
PA-6 composite membrane demonstrated a filtration efficiency
of more than 99.99%, the pressure drop as low as 54 Pa, and
quality factor up to 0.17 Pa-1. As displayed in Fig. 14g, they
also carried out a field test by applying the produced mem-
brane to the air inlet of an air cleaner under a maximum flow
rate in a confined 30 m3 cubic chamber according to the GB/T
18,801–2018 test standard. Ding et al. [182] developed ultra-
fine and self-curly nano-wool felts (NWFs). Owing to the
fluffy curly morphology architecture and the electret effect
(Fig. 14h), the NWFs exhibited brilliant filtration performance
(>99.995% for PM0.3) and low pressure drop of 55 Pa. As
shown in Fig. 14i, large-scale prepared NWFs can be applied
to masks and air purifiers as the core filtration materials.
5.2. Source control – engineering facilities
5.2.1. Bag filter
Bag filter is a common dedusting facility, which is usually
used to remove the PM with continuous and efficient filtration
under the flue gas exhausted from combustion equipment in
various industrial sites. Towards this background, Kim et al.
[183] produced thermally stabile meta-aramid nanofiber by
electrospinning and investigated the influence of fiber diam-
eter on the QF from both experimental and theoretical aspects.
They found that the EPM and DP increased with decreasing
fiber diameter, and the QF increased slightly as the fiber
diameter decreased. In addition, through TGA, XRD, FE-
SEM, FT-IR characterizations, as well as tensile strength
measurement, they confirmed the excellent thermal resistance
of the fibers, along with good chemical and mechanical sta-
bility for use as the heat resistant bag filter media. Jung et al.
[184] prepared polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) NP-coated
high-efficiency bag filters with superhydrophobic
(WCA ~ 152 ) three-dimensional (3D) microporous structures
via air-assisted electrospraying (AAES) technology. This
approach does not require the direct use of PTFE emulsion but
instead coats PTFE NPs via AAES. Compared to the
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 691

Fig. 14. (a) Real window including metallic window screen and coating of PAN direct blow-spun fibers. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [176]. Copyright
(2017) American Chemical Society. (b) Real photograph of free-standing transparent air filter. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [177]. Copyright (2019)
American Chemical Society. (c) Photo of PDMS/PMMA-chitosan transparent filters at 86% transparency. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [145]. Copyright
(2019) Elsevier. (d) Transmittances (%) of the PVA and PVA-LS nanofibrous membranes. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [178]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier.
(e) The contrast of transparency of no window screen a) and PET nanofiber window screen b). Reprinted with permission from Ref. [179]. Copyright (2019) John
Wiley and Sons. (f) The photograph of PVDF/Fe3O4 nanofiber anti-haze window screen. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [180]. Copyright (2020) John Wiley
and Sons. (g) The photo of the air cleaner inlet is covered with the as-produced composite membrane. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [181]. Copyright (2021)
Elsevier. (h) The SEM image of the fully crimp morphology of wool-like nanofibers. (i) Mass-produced NWFs and the resulting core materials of air purifiers.
Reprinted with permission from Ref. [182]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.

traditional electrospraying method, airflow resistance in the
AAES process significantly enhanced throughput. This is
because the former requires both high voltage and long
evaporation times, while the AAES can achieve fast evapo-
ration at low voltage by integrating electrospraying with hy-
draulic air-jet liquid breakup (Fig. 15a). Furthermore, as
shown in Fig. 15b, the original bag filter of the control group
had a filtration efficiency of 65.2% for 0.3–0.5 mm particles,
while it was improved to 91.3% after coating with PTFE NPs.
The study proposed a new way to design high-efficiency bag
filters for large-scale industrial processes.
5.2.2. Electrostatic precipitator (ESP)
Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) is also a common dust
collection device, which is generally used to remove partic-
ulate matter by corona discharge in electric power plants and
the cement industry. ESP can filtrate ultrafine particles effi-
ciently and produce only a low pressure drop. Its main prin-
ciple is the use of a high-voltage electric field to charge the
particles in the air and then quickly collect the charged par-
ticulates through an oppositely charged plate [185]. Jaworek
et al. [186] summarized and investigated three various types
of hybrid electrostatic filtration systems: (1) electrically
692 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697

(a) Electrospray
PTFE NPs Air-assisted (b)
Water droplet electrospray
100

Filtration efficiency @dust (%)

Air

High High 90 Previously

Low only focus on
voltage throughput
volatage large particle

80
ev
ap

ev
Lo ion t

Fa r a t i o n
ap
ora
ng im

st
o
t

70
Control
e

Collisions
Coating
by air-jet
60
0.3–0.5 0.5–1.0 1.0–3.0 3.0–5.0 5.0–10
Repulsive Particle size range (μm)
force
Stable and uniform Unstable and aggregation
(c) (d) (e)
AC supply unit
HV
Collection Discharge
electrode electrode Bag filter
Wires at high HV
potential

Grounded
wires

Bag filter Electrostatic precipitator

Baghouse
Electrostatic Bag
precharge filter
(f) (g)
Catalytic converter Catalytic gasoline
particulate filter

Exhaust from the

gasoline engine Clean gas

HC, soot
NOx

Filter body

Fig. 15. (a) The schematic diagram of AAES process. (b) The filtration efficiency (%) of coated bag filter (green line) and control group (black line). Reprinted
with permission from Ref. [184]. Copyright (2021) Elsevier. (c) The schematic of an electrically energized filter. (d) Schematic illustrating the hybrid electrostatic
filter composed of particulate precharger and bag filter (side view). (e) The schematic diagram of hybrid electrostatic precipitator containing bag filter (top view).
Reprinted with permission from Ref. [186]. Copyright (2019) Elsevier. (f) The particulate matter measurement of real automobile exhaust with Si3N4 NFS filter.
Reprinted with permission from Ref. [116]. Copyright (2021) John Wiley and Sons. (g) Schematic of exhaust regeneration device of gasoline engine. Reprinted
with permission from Ref. [195]. Copyright (2020) Elsevier.

energized filter (bag filters assisted with electric field), in
which filtration fibers are charged via an external electric
field; (2) hybrid electrostatic filters (bag filters with particulate
pre-charging), which include electrostatic particle charging
system and subsequent fibrous/bag filter; (3) hybrid electro-
static precipitators (electrostatic precipitators combined with
bag filters), which comprises a conventional electrostatic
precipitator used for coarse particles and a subsequent bag
filter for the filtration of fine particles (Fig. 15c–e). Gao et al.
[187] studied the effect of the dust layer thickness and re-
sistivity on space electric strength, particle charging and
migration at various temperatures. Results indicated that high
resistivity and dust layer thickness at a high temperature can
adversely affect space electric strength, particle charging and
migration. In addition, electrodes (including collecting
electrode and discharge electrode) were found to be crucial to
the removal efficiency of an electrostatic precipitator. Zhou
et al. [188] developed a multi-physical field model by
COMSOL Multiphysics software to investigate the impact of
six different shapes collecting electrodes on the ionic wind,
re-entrainment effect, and collection efficiency. The results
indicate that the shape of the collecting plates has a great
effect on electric field intensity in the channel and ionic wind
induced by corona discharge, which further influences the
capability of ESP. Among various shapes, the triangular col-
lecting electrode displayed the highest collection efficiency
for particulate matter of different sizes. In the same year, Yook
et al. [189] researched the influence of pipe-and-spike
discharge electrode shape on the collection efficiency of ESP.
Through the near orthogonal array method to optimize
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
geometric parameters, longer wire length and greater distance
between wires were found to be able to enhance the collection
efficiency when the space of collecting plates and the number
of discharge electrode wires were fixed. The highest collection
efficiency was obtained when the bending angle of the wire
was 160 .
5.2.3. Gasoline particulate filter (GPF)
Gasoline particulate filters (GPF) and diesel particulate
filters (DPF) are designed to control the particulate matter
emission effectively from direct injection engines in automo-
biles [190,191]. With the introduction of more and more
stringent vehicle exhaust emission regulations in the United
States, Europe, China, and other regions, GPF will gradually
become a standardized configuration to meet the increasingly
stringent relevant standards [192,193]. Since GPF is exposed
to high temperature and corrosive harsh environment for a
long time, the materials used must be resistant to high tem-
perature, corrosion, and high mechanical strength [193].
Currently, the most commonly used materials in practical
applications are SiC and cordierite. In recent years, Li et al.
[116] prepared a thermally stable (1000  C) Si3N4 NFS, to be
embedded in a device as a filter in order to filtrate particulate
matter from vehicle exhaust (Fig. 15f). When the automobile
started, the exhaust flow rate was 4.24 m s
1 and the filtration
efficiency of various sized PM2.5/PM10 was greater than
99.89% (Fig. 15g). The material is expected to be applied to
GPF in the future. In addition, regeneration performance is an
important index for GPF. When the PM is excessively
deposited in the GPF, the pressure drop will increase rapidly
and the performance of the gasoline engine will also be
severely degraded [194]. At this time, active or passive
regeneration is generally used to continuously oxidize and
burn the deposited PM to restore it. Recently, Meng et al.
[194] studied the effects of ash particle size and loading on the
particulate emission characteristics during the regeneration
process of GPF. Zuo et al. [195] studied the influence of
exhaust parameters on the particulate oxidation rate and
regeneration performance of catalytic gasoline particulate fil-
ter (CGPF) in equilibrium state by the simulation software
Fluent. As shown in Fig. 15g, the gasoline engine exhaust
regeneration device consists of a catalytic converter and a
CGPF. Zuo et al. [196] also conducted a series of research in
the CGPF regeneration system with electric heating. They
compared and analyzed the regeneration performance differ-
ences between the new CGPF and the traditional CGPF. The
comparison results showed that the new CGPF with electric
heating can significantly improve the regeneration perfor-
mance with a small increase in pressure drop. These studies
provided important references for improving the regeneration
performance of GPFs.
6. Conclusions and outlook
Particulate matter, as a serious air pollutant, can not only
form the haze that covers the sky and affect the regional envi-
ronment and climate but also readily carries bacteria or viruses
693
and penetrate deep into the lungs of living organisms [12–14].
Thus, particulate pollution has aroused wide concern from the
government and public, and high-efficiency filtration of PM is
extremely urgent. In this review, we firstly introduce the basic
theory of PM filtration and then summarize advanced filtration
materials, various related functions, and effort in application in
recent years. Considering that some emerging infectious dis-
eases pandemic and comfortableness of PM filters, antibacterial
property, and special wettability are described along with PM
filtration efficiency. It is worth mentioning that there have been
no reports to cover the progress from application perspectives,
and this review has initiated an effort to fill up this gap.
Although great progress has been made on particulate
matter filtration, there are still a variety of challenges to
overcome. First, classic solution electrospinning technology
commonly used in the preparation of nanofiber filtration
membranes is not environment friendly and a large amount of
toxic organic solvents will be volatilized during the electro-
spinning process, which may pose a potential threat to phys-
ical health and natural environment [197,198]. The use of
high-voltage power supplies will cause a large amount of
energy consumption, and the electrospinning speed is slow,
making it difficult to achieve large-scale rapid production.
Second, as disposable masks become a part of our lives, the
disposal of large volumes of wasted disposable filter media
will become a heavy environmental burden. Third, existing
respirators still suffer from insufficient comforts, such as bad
breathability, poor thermal comfort, damp sensation, and
indentation when worn for long periods. Fourth, in the context
of the COVID-19 pandemic, although many related reports on
antibacterial, antiviral and its filtration have been introduced in
this review, these technologies are not yet mature enough, and
there are still many difficulties in practical application.
Therefore, based on the existing development and analysis of
the advantages and disadvantages, future research should be
focused on the following aspects. First, water-soluble electro-
spinning and solvent-free melt electrospinning will make a big
splash in green and non-toxic production of nanofiber filtration
membranes, because they abandon the traditional volatile
organic solvents [198]. The multi-needle and needleless elec-
trospinning will accelerate the large-scale rapid production of
electrospun nanofiber filtration membranes. Second, more
attention will be paid to biodegradable materials and the reus-
ability of filters. Exploring home-based air filter regeneration
standardized disinfection methods and tools may be a good way
to reduce wasted disposable filter media. Third, not only the
filtration efficiency of the respirator, but also the pressure drop
and air permeability needs to be considered. The special wetta-
bility, high water vapor transmission rate, and good heat dissi-
pation are also critical to the comfort of a personal protective
respirator. Fourth, due to highly infectious diseases pandemic
such as SARS, MERS, and COVID-19, personal protective
equipment which can filtrate bacteria and viruses, as well as
possess antibacterial and antiviral properties may become a
greatly significant research direction. In particular, the estab-
lishment of a more effective and safer standardized method for
the simulated filtration test of the COVID-19 is extremely
694 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
beneficial for the further research of advanced filtration materials
when we encounter future pandemics. Finally, multifunctional
integrated filtration devices that can remove multiple air pol-
lutants at the same time may be of interest, such as denitrifica-
tion, desulfurization, VOCs removal. Despite many emerging
research advances that have been reviewed here, more efforts
should be made into this field in terms of advanced materials and
device design to satisfy the diversified demands.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank National Natural Science Foundation of
China (22075046, 51972063), Natural Science Funds for
Distinguished Young Scholar of Fujian Province
(2020J06038), Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province
(2020J01514, 2019J01652, 2019J01256), China Postdoctoral
Science Foundation (Pre-station) (Project No. 2019TQ0061),
and 111 Project (No. D17005).
References
[1] B. Brunekreef, S.T. Holgate, Lancet 360 (2002) 1233–1242.
[2] R. Betha, S.N. Behera, R. Balasubramanian, Environ. Sci. Technol. 48
(2014) 4327–4335.
[3] J. Xiao, J. Liang, C. Zhang, Y. Tao, G.-W. Ling, Q.-H. Yang, Small
Methods 2 (2018) 1800012.
[4] H.J. Lee, W.S. Choi, Materials 13 (2020) 5714.
[5] Z. Cheng, J.K. Jiang, O. Fajardo, S.X. Wang, J.M. Hao, Atmos. Envi-
ron. 65 (2013) 186–194.
[6] C.K. Chan, X. Yao, Atmos. Environ. 42 (2008) 1–42.
[7] X.D. Li, L. Jin, H.D. Kan, Nature 570 (2019) 437–439.
[8] L. Jin, J. Xie, C.K.C. Wong, S.K.Y. Chan, G. Abbaszade, J. Schnelle-
Kreis, R. Zimmermann, J. Li, G. Zhang, P. Fu, X. Li, Environ. Sci.
Technol. 53 (2019) 2881–2891.
[9] X. Yuan, X. Deng, C. Cai, Z. Shi, H. Liang, S. Li, Z. Qiao, Green
Energy Environ. 6 (2021) 759–770.
[10] Lancet 383 (2014) 845.
[11] J. Ren, B. Li, D. Yu, J. Liu, Z. Ma, J. Thorac. Dis. 8 (2016) E1–E7.
[12] J. Gao, A. Woodward, S. Vardoulakis, S. Kovats, P. Wilkinson, L. Li,
L. Xu, J. Li, J. Yang, J. Li, L. Cao, X. Liu, H. Wu, Q. Liu, Sci. Total
Environ. 578 (2017) 148–157.
[13] P.K. Quinn, T.S. Bates, Geophys. Res. Lett. 30 (2003) 1555.
[14] WHO Global Air Quality Guidelines, Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and
PM10), Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Carbon Monox-
ide, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2021.
[15] J.Y. Zheng, W.K. Zhao, L. Song, H. Wang, H. Yan, G. Chen, C.B. Han,
J. Zhang, Green Energy Environ. (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.gee.2022.01.008.
[16] C.L. Huang, Y.M. Wang, X.W. Li, L.L. Ren, J.P. Zhao, Y. Hu, L. Zhang,
G.H. Fan, J.Y. Xu, X.Y. Gu, Z.S. Cheng, T. Yu, J.A. Xia, Y. Wei,
W.J. Wu, X.L. Xie, W. Yin, H. Li, M. Liu, Y. Xiao, H. Gao, L. Guo,
J.G. Xie, G.F. Wang, R.M. Jiang, Z.C. Gao, Q. Jin, J.W. Wang, B. Cao,
Lancet 395 (2020) 497–506.
[17] A.E. Gorbalenya, S.C. Baker, R.S. Baric, R.J. de Groot, C. Drosten,
A.A. Gulyaeva, B.L. Haagmans, C. Lauber, A.M. Leontovich,
B.W. Neuman, D. Penzar, S. Perlman, L.L.M. Poon, D.V. Samborskiy,
I.A. Sidorov, I. Sola, J. Ziebuhr, G. Coronaviridae Study, Nat. Micro-
biol. 5 (2020) 536–544.
[18] V.M. Corman, O. Landt, M. Kaiser, R. Molenkamp, A. Meijer,
D.K.W. Chu, T. Bleicker, S. Brünink, J. Schneider, M.L. Schmidt,
D.G.J.C. Mulders, B.L. Haagmans, B. van der Veer, S. van den Brink,
L. Wijsman, G. Goderski, J.-L. Romette, J. Ellis, M. Zambon, M. Peiris,
H. Goossens, C. Reusken, M.P.G. Koopmans, C. Drosten, Euro Surveill.
25 (2020) 2000045.
[19] L. Setti, F. Passarini, G. De Gennaro, P. Barbieri, M.G. Perrone,
M. Borelli, J. Palmisani, A. Di Gilio, V. Torboli, F. Fontana,
L. Clemente, A. Pallavicini, M. Ruscio, P. Piscitelli, A. Miani, Environ.
Res. 188 (2020) 109754.
[20] S. Han, J. Kim, S.H. Ko, Mater. Today Adv. 9 (2021) 100134.
[21] L.M. Henning, A. Abdullayev, C. Vakifahmetoglu, U. Simon,
H. Bensalah, A. Gurlo, M.F. Bekheet, Adv. Energy Sustainability Res. 2
(2021) 2100005.
[22] J.D. Wang, B. Zhao, S.X. Wang, F.M. Yang, J. Xing, L. Morawska,
A.J. Ding, M. Kulmala, V.M. Kerminen, J. Kujansuu, Z.F. Wang,
D.A. Ding, X.Y. Zhang, H.B. Wang, M. Tian, T. Petaja, J.K. Jiang,
J.M. Hao, Sci. Total Environ. 584 (2017) 426–447.
[23] C.-h. Zheng, C. Kanaoka, J. Zhejiang Univ. – Sci. 19 (2018) 21–33.
[24] B.J. Chiaramonte de Castro, R. Sartim, V.G. Guerra, M.L. Aguiar,
Process Saf. Environ. Protect. 144 (2020) 193–207.
[25] B. Guan, R. Zhan, H. Lin, Z. Huang, J. Environ. Manag. 154 (2015)
225–258.
[26] S. Zhang, Q. Ren, H. Qi, S. Liu, Y. Liu, ACS Nano 13 (2019) 2729–
2748.
[27] A.J. White, J.P. Keller, S. Zhao, R. Carroll, J.D. Kaufman, D.P. Sandler,
Environ. Health Perspect. 127 (2019) 107002.
[28] H. Liu, C. Cao, J. Huang, Z. Chen, G. Chen, Y. Lai, Nanoscale 12
(2020) 437–453.
[29] M.H. Chua, W. Cheng, S.S. Goh, J. Kong, B. Li, J.Y.C. Lim, L. Mao,
S. Wang, K. Xue, L. Yang, E. Ye, K. Zhang, W.C.D. Cheong, B.H. Tan,
Z. Li, B.H. Tan, X.J. Loh, Research 2020 (2020) 7286735.
[30] W. Deng, Y. Sun, X. Yao, K. Subramanian, C. Ling, H. Wang,
S.S. Chopra, B.B. Xu, J.-X. Wang, J.-F. Chen, D. Wang, H. Amancio,
S. Pramana, R. Ye, S. Wang, Adv. Sci. 9 (2022) 2102189.
[31] R. Zhang, B. Liu, A. Yang, Y. Zhu, C. Liu, G. Zhou, J. Sun, P.-C. Hsu,
W. Zhao, D. Lin, Y. Liu, A. Pei, J. Xie, W. Chen, J. Xu, Y. Jin, T. Wu,
X. Huang, Y. Cui, Nano Lett. 18 (2018) 1130–1138.
[32] N. Li, C. Sioutas, A. Cho, D. Schmitz, C. Misra, J. Sempf, M. Wang,
T. Oberley, J. Froines, A. Nel, Environ. Health Perspect. 111 (2003)
455–460.
[33] C.J. Lee, R.V. Martin, D.K. Henze, M. Brauer, A. Cohen,
A.V. Donkelaar, Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 (2015) 4335–4344.
[34] R.A. Rohde, R.A. Muller, PLoS One 10 (2015), e0135749.
[35] D. Horton, C.B. Skinner, D. Singh, N.S. Diffenbaugh, Nat. Clim.
Change 4 (2014) 698–703.
[36] X. Li, S. Zhou, W. Fan, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 13 (2016)
575.
[37] J.W. Xie, L. Jin, T.T. He, B.W. Chen, X.S. Luo, B.H. Feng, W. Huang,
J. Li, P.Q. Fu, X.D. Li, Environ. Sci. Technol. 53 (2019) 963–972.
[38] F. Ming, C.K. Chan, X. Yao, Atmos. Environ. 43 (2009) 79–86.
[39] A. Mukherjee, M. Agrawal, Environ. Chem. Lett. 15 (2017) 283–309.
[40] M. Viana, T.A.J. Kuhlbusch, X. Querol, A. Alastuey, R.M. Harrison,
P.K. Hopke, W. Winiwarter, A. Vallius, S. Szidat, A.S.H. Prevot,
C. Hueglin, H. Bloemen, P. Wahlin, R. Vecchi, A.I. Miranda, A. Kasper-
Giebl, W. Maenhaut, R. Hitzenberger, J. Aerosol Sci. 39 (2008) 827–
849.
[41] Z. Xie, C. Fan, R. Lu, P. Liu, B. Wang, S. Du, C. Jin, S. Deng, Y. Li,
Environ. Pollut. 243 (2018) 1930–1942.
[42] B. Xu, J. Hao, Environ. Int. 107 (2017) 33–46.
[43] B. Archer, V.R. Shaumbwa, D. Liu, M. Li, T. Iimaa, U. Surenjav, Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 60 (2021) 7517–7534.
[44] C.-S. Wang, Y. Otani, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (2012) 5–17.
[45] I.M. Hutten, J. Eng, Fibers Fabr 2 (2007) 445–455.
[46] P. Li, C. Wang, Y. Zhang, F. Wei, Small 10 (2014) 4543–4561.
[47] C.Y. Chen, Chem. Rev. 55 (1955) 595–623.
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
[48] J. Xu, X. Xiao, W. Zhang, R. Xu, S.C. Kim, Y. Cui, T.T. Howard,
E. Wu, One Earth 3 (2020) 574–589.
[49] W.W.-F. Leung, C.-H. Hung, P.-T. Yuen, Separ. Purif. Technol. 71
(2010) 30–37.
[50] C.-S. Wang, Powder Technol. 118 (2001) 166–170.
[51] K. Zhao, J. Huang, J. Mao, Z. Bao, Z. Chen, Y. Lai, Chem. Eng. J. 395
(2020) 125086.
[52] Y. Xie, F. Guo, J. Mao, J. Huang, Z. Chen, Y. Jiang, Y. Lai, Separ. Purif.
Technol. 254 (2021) 117571.
[53] C. Liu, P.C. Hsu, H.W. Lee, M. Ye, G. Zheng, N. Liu, W. Li, Y. Cui,
Nat. Commun. 6 (2015) 1–9.
[54] N. Zhu, D. Zhang, W. Wang, X. Li, B. Yang, J. Song, X. Zhao,
B. Huang, W. Shi, R. Lu, P. Niu, F. Zhan, X. Ma, D. Wang, W. Xu,
G. Wu, G.F. Gao, W. Tan, China Novel Coronavirus Investigating
Team., N. Engl. J. Med. 382 (2020) 727–733.
[55] Q. Wang, Y. Wei, W. Li, X. Luo, X. Zhang, J. Di, G. Wang, J. Yu,
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 60 (2021) 23756–23762.
[56] M. Zaatari, A. Novoselac, J. Siegel, Build. Environ. 73 (2014) 151–161.
[57] T. Xia, C. Chen, J. Hazard. Mater. 402 (2021) 123479.
[58] N. Han, Y.S. Lee, B.K. Kaang, W. Jang, H.Y. Koo, W.S. Choi, J. Mater.
Chem. A 7 (2019) 6001–6011.
[59] X. Fan, Y. Wang, M. Zheng, F. Dunne, T. Liu, X. Fu, L. Kong, S. Pan,
W.-H. Zhong, J. Mater. Chem. A 6 (2018) 21585–21595.
[60] L. Zhang, W.-L. Yuan, Z. Zhang, G.-H. Zhang, H. Chen, N. Zhao,
L. He, G.-H. Tao, J. Mater. Chem. A 7 (2019) 4619–4625.
[61] R. Zhang, C. Liu, P.-C. Hsu, C. Zhang, N. Liu, J. Zhang, H.R. Lee,
Y. Lu, Y. Qiu, S. Chu, Nano Lett. 16 (2016) 3642–3649.
[62] Z. Hao, J. Wu, C. Wang, J. Liu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 (2019)
11904–11909.
[63] A. Rajak, D.A. Hapidin, F. Iskandar, M.M. Munir, K. Khairurrijal,
Waste Manag. 103 (2020) 76–86.
[64] F. Zuo, S. Zhang, H. Liu, H. Fong, X. Yin, J. Yu, B. Ding, Small 13
(2017) 1702139.
[65] X. Li, C. Wang, X. Huang, T. Zhang, X. Wang, M. Min, L. Wang, H. Huang,
B.S. Hsiao, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 10 (2018) 42891–42904.
[66] C.X. Li, S.Y. Kuang, Y.H. Chen, Z.L. Wang, C. Li, G. Zhu, ACS Appl.
Mater. Interfaces 10 (2018) 24332–24338.
[67] Q. Zhang, Q. Li, T.M. Young, D.P. Harper, S. Wang, ACS Sustain.
Chem. Eng. 7 (2019) 8706–8714.
[68] W. Na, A. Raza, S. Yang, J. Yu, B. Ding, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 398
(2013) 240–246.
[69] R. Balgis, H. Murata, Y. Goi, T. Ogi, K. Okuyama, L. Bao, Langmuir 33
(2017) 6127–6134.
[70] Z. Wang, C. Zhao, Z. Pan, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 441 (2015) 121–129.
[71] J. Guo, A. Hanif, J. Shang, B.J. Deka, N. Zhi, A.K. An, Chem. Eng. J.
405 (2021) 126584.
[72] Q. Fan, W. Liang, T.-T. Fan, X. Li, S.-Y. Yan, M. Yu, X. Ning, Y.-
Z. Long, Compos. Commun. 22 (2020) 100533.
[73] K.S. Han, S. Lee, M. Kim, P. Park, M.H. Lee, J. Nah, Adv. Funct. Mater.
29 (2019) 1903633.
[74] S. Lu, C. Li, R. Liu, A. Lv, Appl. Sci.-Basel 11 (2021) 11094.
[75] D. Buivydiene, A.M. Todea, C. Asbach, E. Krugly, D. Martuzevicius,
L. Kliucininkas, J. Aerosol Sci. 154 (2021) 105754.
[76] Y. Lou, S. Ding, B. Wang, J. Wang, Q. Sun, X. Jin, X. Li, Nanotech-
nology 32 (2021) 315708.
[77] S. Zhang, H. Liu, N. Tang, S. Zhou, J. Yu, B. Ding, Adv. Mater. 32
(2020) 2002361.
[78] R. Chen, H. Zhang, M. Wang, X. Zhang, Z. Gan, ACS Appl. Nano
Mater. 4 (2021) 182–189.
[79] P. Zhang, S. Zhang, D. Wan, P. Zhang, Z. Zhang, G. Shao, J. Hazard.
Mater. 395 (2020) 122639.
[80] Z. Xiong, J. Lin, X. Li, F. Bian, J. Wang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
13 (2021) 12408–12416.
[81] H. Tian, X. Fu, M. Zheng, Y. Wang, Y. Li, A. Xiang, W.H. Zhong, Nano
Res. 11 (2018) 4265–4277.
[82] X. Yu, C. Li, H. Tian, L. Yuan, A. Xiang, J. Li, C. Wang, A.V. Rajulu,
Chem. Eng. J. 396 (2020) 125373.
695
[83] X. Xie, Z. Zheng, X. Wang, D.L. Kaplan, ACS Nano 15 (2021) 1048–
1058.
[84] Z. Hu, S. Yan, X. Li, R. You, Q. Zhang, D.L. Kaplan, ACS Nano 15
(2021) 8171–8183.
[85] S. Choi, H. Jeon, M. Jang, H. Kim, G. Shin, J.M. Koo, M. Lee,
H.K. Sung, Y. Eom, H.S. Yang, Adv. Sci. 8 (2021) 2003155.
[86] B. Chen, S. Xiang, G. Qian, Acc. Chem. Res. 43 (2010) 1115–1124.
[87] B. Wang, L.-H. Xie, X. Wang, X.-M. Liu, J. Li, J.-R. Li, Green Energy
Environ. 3 (2018) 191–228.
[88] G. F
erey, Chem. Soc. Rev. 37 (2008) 191–214.
[89] G. F
erey, C. Mellot-Draznieks, C. Serre, F. Millange, J. Dutour,
S. Surbl
e, I. Margiolaki, Science 309 (2005) 2040–2042.
[90] S. Kitagawa, Chem. Soc. Rev. 43 (2014) 5415–5418.
[91] R. Kitaura, S. Kitagawa, Y. Kubota, T.C. Kobayashi, K. Kindo, Y. Mita,
A. Matsuo, M. Kobayashi, H.-C. Chang, T.C. Ozawa, Science 298
(2002) 2358–2361.
[92] H. Li, M. Eddaoudi, M. O'Keeffe, O.M. Yaghi, Nature 402 (1999) 276–
279.
[93] X. Tang, N. Li, H. Pang, Green Energy Environ. 7 (2022) 636–661.
[94] X. Ma, Y. Chai, P. Li, B. Wang, Acc. Chem. Res. 52 (2019) 1461–1470.
[95] D. Bradshaw, A. Garai, J. Huo, Chem. Soc. Rev. 41 (2012) 2344–2381.
[96] A. Betard, R.A. Fischer, Chem. Rev. 112 (2012) 1055–1083.
[97] O. Shekhah, J. Liu, R. Fischer, C. W€oll, Chem. Soc. Rev. 40 (2011)
1081–1106.
[98] C. Duan, Y. Yu, J. Xiao, Y. Li, P. Yang, F. Hu, H. Xi, Green Energy
Environ. 6 (2021) 33–49.
[99] H.T. Wang, H. Xu, H. Li, X. Liu, Z.Q. Du, W.D. Yu, ACS Appl. Polym.
Mater. 3 (2021) 710–719.
[100] H.C. Woo, D.K. Yoo, S.H. Jhung, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 95 (2021) 277–285.
[101] D.K. Yoo, H.C. Woo, S.H. Jhung, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13
(2021) 23092–23102.
[102] J. Mao, M. Ge, I.W.P. Chen, Y.H. Ng, T. Zhu, H. Liu, J. Huang, W. Cai,
Y. Lai, Mater. Chem. Front. 5 (2021) 2742–2748.
[103] S. Sumathi, S. Bhatia, K.T. Lee, A.R. Mohamed, J. Hazard. Mater. 176
(2010) 1093–1096.
[104] M.S. Mauter, M. Elimelech, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 5843.
[105] S. Wang, J. Bai, M.T. Innocent, Q. Wang, H. Xiang, J. Tang, M. Zhu,
Green Energy Environ. 7 (2022) 578–605.
[106] K. Yuan, S. Feng, F. Zhang, Z. Zhong, W. Xing, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
59 (2020) 19680–19688.
[107] M.Y. Chen, J.Y. Jiang, S.S. Feng, Z.X. Low, Z.X. Zhong, W.H. Xing,
J. Membr. Sci. 635 (2021) 119463.
[108] D. Li, Y. Xia, Adv. Mater. 16 (2004) 1151–1170.
[109] D. Li, Y. Wang, Y. Xia, Nano Lett. 3 (2003) 1167–1171.
[110] X. Mao, B. Ding, M. Wang, Y. Yin, Carbohydr. Polym. 80 (2010) 839–844.
[111] X. Mao, Y. Si, Y. Chen, L. Yang, F. Zhao, B. Ding, J. Yu, RSC Adv. 2
(2012) 12216–12223.
[112] Y. Wang, W. Li, Y. Xia, X. Jiao, D. Chen, J. Mater. Chem. A 2 (2014)
15124–15131.
[113] A. Dey, N. Kayal, O. Chakrabarti, R.F. Caldato, C.M. Andr
e,
M.D. Innocentini, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (2013) 18362–18372.
[114] W. Wei, W. Zhang, Q. Jiang, P. Xu, Z. Zhong, F. Zhang, W. Xing,
J. Membr. Sci. 540 (2017) 381–390.
[115] A.D. ey, N. Kayal, O. Chakrabarti, R.F. Caldato, M.D.D.M. Innocentini,
V.G. Guerra, Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 11 (2015) 804–816.
[116] M. Li, L. Su, H. Wang, P. Wan, P. Guo, Z. Cai, H. Gao, Z. Zhang, D. Lu,
Small 17 (2021) 2100556.
[117] S. Jeong, H. Cho, S. Han, P. Won, H. Lee, S. Hong, J. Yeo, J. Kwon,
S.H. Ko, Nano Lett. 17 (2017) 4339–4346.
[118] J. Malloy, A. Quintana, C.J. Jensen, K. Liu, Nano Lett. 21 (2021) 2968–
2974.
[119] L.M. Valencia-Osorio, M.L. Alvarez-Lainez, Macromol. Mater. Eng.
306 (2021) 2100278.
[120] A. Zhang, H. Li, A. Zhang, J. Zhou, Y. Yan, Compos. Commun. 23
(2021) 100582.
[121] S. Jiang, B. Uch, S. Agarwal, A. Greiner, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9
(2017) 32308–32315.
696 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697
[122] I. Gouzman, E. Grossman, R. Verker, N. Atar, A. Bolker, N. Eliaz, Adv.
Mater. 31 (2019) 1807738.
[123] F. Xie, Y. Wang, L. Zhuo, F. Jia, D. Ning, Z. Lu, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 12 (2020) 56499–56508.
[124] S. Qiao, S. Kang, J. Zhu, Y. Wang, J. Yu, Z. Hu, J. Hazard. Mater. 415
(2021) 125739.
[125] F. Xie, Y. Wang, L. Zhuo, D. Ning, N. Yan, J. Li, S. Chen, Z. Lu,
J. Hazard. Mater. 412 (2021) 125260.
[126] H. Zhang, Y. Xie, Y. Song, X. Qin, Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng.
Asp. 624 (2021) 126831.
[127] X. Yang, Y. Pu, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, J. Li, D. Yuan, X. Ning, J. Hazard
Mater. 391 (2020) 122254.
[128] Lancet 395 (2020) 537.
[129] S. Adepu, M. Khandelwal, J. Mater. Sci. 53 (2018) 1596–1609.
[130] Y. Ju, T. Han, J. Yin, Q. Li, Z. Chen, Z. Wei, Y. Zhang, L. Dong, Sci.
Total Environ. 777 (2021) 145768.
[131] Y. Xiao, Y. Wang, W. Zhu, J. Yao, C. Sun, J. Militky, M. Venkataraman,
G. Zhu, Separ. Purif. Technol. 259 (2021) 118135.
[132] X. Fan, L. Rong, L. Kong, Y. Li, J. Huang, Y. Cao, W.-H. Zhong, ACS
Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 (2021) 8736–8744.
[133] X. Fan, Y. Wang, W.-H. Zhong, S. Pan, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11
(2019) 14266–14274.
[134] D.Y. Choi, K.J. Heo, J. Kang, E.J. An, S.-H. Jung, B.U. Lee, H.M. Lee,
J.H. Jung, J. Hazard. Mater. 351 (2018) 29–37.
[135] S. Jang, S. Jung, S. Song, S. Lee, H. Lee, E. Cho, H.J. Lee, S. Park,
B. Youn, K.H. Park, Environ.-Sci. Nano 8 (2021) 1226–1235.
[136] F.S. Victor, V. Kugarajah, M. Bangaru, S. Ranjan, S. Dharmalingam,
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28 (2021) 37520–37533.
[137] Z. Zhong, Z. Xu, T. Sheng, J. Yao, W. Xing, Y. Wang, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 7 (2015) 21538–21544.
[138] Q. Li, Y. Yin, D. Cao, Y. Wang, P. Luan, X. Sun, W. Liang, H. Zhu, ACS
Nano 15 (2021) 11992–12005.
[139] K.J. Heo, S.B. Jeong, J. Shin, G.B. Hwang, H.S. Ko, Y. Kim, D.Y. Choi,
J.H. Jung, Nano Lett. 21 (2021) 1576–1583.
[140] Y. Si, Z. Zhang, W. Wu, Q. Fu, K. Huang, N. Nitin, B. Ding, G. Sun,
Sci. Adv. 4 (2018) eaar5931.
[141] P. Li, J. Li, X. Feng, J. Li, Y. Hao, J. Zhang, H. Wang, A. Yin, J. Zhou,
X. Ma, B. Wang, Nat. Commun. 10 (2019) 2117.
[142] T.-T. Li, H. Zhang, B. Gao, B.-C. Shiu, H.-T. Ren, H.-K. Peng, C.-
W. Lou, J.-H. Lin, Chem. Eng. J. 422 (2021) 130007.
[143] K. Chen, S.P. Nikam, Z.K. Zander, Y.-H. Hsu, N.Z. Dreger, M. Cakmak,
M.L. Becker, ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. 2 (2020) 304–316.
[144] Y. Gao, Y. Bach Truong, Y. Zhu, I. Louis Kyratzis, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.
131 (2014) 40797.
[145] H. Liu, J. Huang, J. Mao, Z. Chen, G. Chen, Y. Lai, iScience 19 (2019)
214–223.
[146] L. Zhang, L. Li, L. Wang, J. Nie, G. Ma, Appl. Surf. Sci. 515 (2020)
145962.
[147] S. Kumar, J. Jang, H. Oh, B.J. Jung, Y. Lee, H. Park, K.H. Yang,
Y.C. Seong, J.-S. Lee, ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 4 (2021) 2375–2385.
[148] C. Tian, F. Wu, W. Jiao, X. Liu, X. Yin, Y. Si, J. Yu, B. Ding, Compos.
Commun. 24 (2021) 100668.
[149] S. Li, J. Huang, Y. Lai, Chem. J. Chinese Univ.-Chinese 42 (2021)
1043–1060.
[150] C.W. Kang, J. Jin, Y.J. Ko, S.M. Lee, H.J. Kim, S.U. Son, ACS Appl.
Mater. Interfaces 11 (2019) 1748–1753.
[151] Y. Lei, Z.Y. Tian, H.X. Sun, Z.Q. Zhu, W.D. Liang, A. Li, Sci. Total
Environ. 766 (2021) 142594.
[152] Y. Lei, Z. Tian, H. Sun, F. Liu, Z. Zhu, W. Liang, A. Li, ACS Appl.
Mater. Interfaces 13 (2021) 5823–5833.
[153] T. Liu, C.C. Cai, R.J. Ma, Y.F. Deng, L.Y. Tu, Y.F. Fan, D.J. Lu, ACS
Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 (2021) 24032–24041.
[154] Z. Zeng, X.Y.D. Ma, Y. Zhang, Z. Wang, B.F. Ng, M.P. Wan, X. Lu,
ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 7 (2019) 6959–6968.
[155] X. Zhao, Y. Li, T. Hua, P. Jiang, X. Yin, J. Yu, B. Ding, Small 13 (2017)
1603306.
[156] Z. Wang, Y. Zhang, X.Y.D. Ma, J. Ang, Z. Zeng, B.F. Ng, M.P. Wan, S.-
C. Wong, X. Lu, Separ. Purif. Technol. 235 (2020) 116183.
[157] Z. Wang, F. Yan, H. Pei, K. Yan, Z. Cui, B. He, K. Fang, J. Li,
J. Membr. Sci. 594 (2020) 117445.
[158] W. Xu, Y. Chen, Y. Liu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 (2021) 3109–3118.
[159] S. Park, H.Y. Koo, C.Z. Yu, W.S. Choi, Chem. Eng. J. 410 (2021)
128302.
[160] W. Hao, A. Parasch, S. Williams, J. Li, H. Ma, J. Burken, Y. Wang, Int.
J. Hyg. Environ. Health 229 (2020) 113582.
[161] A. Konda, A. Prakash, G.A. Moss, M. Schmoldt, G.D. Grant, S. Guha,
ACS Nano 14 (2020) 6339–6347.
[162] M.H. Bagheri, I. Khalaji, A. Azizi, R.T. Loibl, N. Basualdo, S. Manzo,
M.L. Gorrepati, S. Mehendale, C. Mohr, S.N. Schiffres, Aerosol Sci.
Technol. 55 (2021) 817–827.
[163] F. Drewnick, J. Pikmann, F. Fachinger, L. Moormann, F. Sprang,
S. Borrmann, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 55 (2021) 63–79.
[164] T. Joo, M. Takeuchi, F. Liu, M.P. Rivera, J. Barr, E.S. Blum, E. Parker,
J.H. Tipton, J. Varnedoe, B. Dutta, R.P. Lively, N.L. Ng, Aerosol Sci.
Technol. 55 (2021) 930–942.
[165] S.N. Rogak, T.A. Sipkens, M. Guan, H. Nikookar, D. Vargas Figueroa,
J. Wang, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 55 (2021) 398–413.
[166] Y.I. Kim, M.W. Kim, S. An, A.L. Yarin, S.S. Yoon, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 13 (2021) 857–867.
[167] H. Zhong, Z.R. Zhu, J. Lin, C.F. Cheung, V.L. Lu, F. Yan, C.Y. Chan,
G.J. Li, ACS Nano 14 (2020) 6213–6221.
[168] P. Kumar, S. Roy, A. Sarkar, A. Jaiswal, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13
(2021) 12912–12927.
[169] E. Koh, H.M. Park, Y.T. Lee, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 93 (2021) 339–350.
[170] Y. Li, X. Yin, Y. Si, J. Yu, B. Ding, Chem. Eng. J. 398 (2020) 125626.
[171] J. Cui, Y. Wang, T. Lu, K. Liu, C. Huang, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 597
(2021) 48–55.
[172] H. Lee, S. Jeon, ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 3 (2020) 8192–8198.
[173] C. Ding, Y. Liu, P. Xie, J. Lan, Y. Yu, X. Fu, X. Yang, W.-H. Zhong,
J. Mater. Chem. A 9 (2021) 13143–13150.
[174] V. Kadam, Y.B. Truong, J. Schutz, I.L. Kyratzis, R. Padhye, L. Wang,
J. Hazard. Mater. 403 (2021) 123841.
[175] J. Xu, C. Liu, P.-C. Hsu, K. Liu, R. Zhang, Y. Liu, Y. Cui, Nano Lett. 16
(2016) 1270–1275.
[176] B. Khalid, X. Bai, H. Wei, Y. Huang, H. Wu, Y. Cui, Nano Lett. 17
(2017) 1140–1148.
[177] S. Zhang, H. Liu, N. Tang, N. Ali, J. Yu, B. Ding, ACS Nano 13 (2019)
13501–13512.
[178] J. Cui, T. Lu, F. Li, Y. Wang, J. Lei, W. Ma, Y. Zou, C. Huang, J. Colloid
Interface Sci. 582 (2021) 506–514.
[179] L. Du, Y. Zhang, X. Li, J. Wang, M. Chen, X. Zuo, W. Yang, M. Yousefzadeh,
S. Ramakrishana, H. Li, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 137 (2019) 48657.
[180] F. Liu, M. Li, F. Li, K. Weng, K. Qi, C. Liu, Q. Ni, X. Tao, J. Zhang,
W. Shao, J. He, Macromol. Mater. Eng. 305 (2020) 1900856.
[181] J.-P. Chen, S.-C. Chen, X.-Q. Wu, X.-X. Ke, R.-X. Wu, Y.-M. Zheng,
J. Membr. Sci. 633 (2021) 119392.
[182] Y. Li, L. Cao, X. Yin, Y. Si, J. Yu, B. Ding, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 578
(2020) 565–573.
[183] H.B. Kim, W.J. Lee, S.C. Choi, K.B. Lee, M.-H. Lee, Separ. Purif.
Technol. 222 (2019) 332–341.
[184] K.J. Heo, H.J. Oh, H. Eom, Y. Kim, J.H. Jung, Sci. Total Environ. 783
(2021) 147043.
[185] A. Afshari, L. Ekberg, L. Forejt, J. Mo, S. Rahimi, J. Siegel, W. Chen,
P. Wargocki, S. Zurami, J. Zhang, Sustainability 12 (2020) 8774.
[186] A. Jaworek, A.T. Sobczyk, A. Krupa, A. Marchewicz, T. Czech,


L. Sliwi
nski, Separ. Purif. Technol. 213 (2019) 283–302.
[187] H. Zhang, Y. Wang, W. Gao, Z. Wu, Z. Yang, Y. Yang, W. Wu,
C. Zheng, X. Gao, Fuel Process. Technol. 213 (2021) 106659.
[188] W. Zhou, R. Jiang, Y. Sun, B. Chen, B. Liu, Powder Technol. 381
(2021) 412–420.
[189] G.-H. Lee, S.-Y. Hwang, T.-W. Cheon, H.-J. Kim, B. Han, S.-J. Yook,
Powder Technol. 379 (2021) 241–250.
[190] R. Walter, J. Neumann, O. Hinrichsen, Environ. Sci. Technol. 54 (2020)
9285–9294.
[191] M.P. Orihuela, R. Chacartegui, A. Gomez-Martin, J. Ramirez-Rico,
J.A. Becerra Villanueva, J. Clean. Prod. 260 (2020) 120863.
 X. Ji et al. / Green Energy & Environment 8 (2023) 673–697 697

[192] T. Fang, L. Wang, Z. Wang, J. Automot. Saf. Energy 8 (2017) 226–238.
[193] O.I. Awad, X. Ma, M. Kamil, O.M. Ali, Z. Zhang, S. Shuai, Sci. Total
Environ. 718 (2020) 137302.
[194] Z. Meng, Z. Chen, J. Tan, W. Wang, Z. Zhang, J. Huang, J. Fang, Chem.
Eng. Sci. 248 (2022) 117114.
[195] Q. Zuo, Y. Tang, W. Chen, J. Zhang, L. Shi, Y. Xie, Fuel 265 (2020) 117001.
[196] Q. Zuo, Y. Xie, G. Zhu, K. Wei, B. Zhang, W. Chen, Y. Tang, Z. Wang,
Energy 225 (2021) 120265.
[197] Y. Deng, T. Lu, J. Cui, S.K. Samal, R. Xiong, C. Huang, Separ. Purif.
Technol. 277 (2021) 119623.
[198] D. Lv, M. Zhu, Z. Jiang, S. Jiang, Q. Zhang, R. Xiong, C. Huang,
Macromol. Mater. Eng. 303 (2018) 1800336.