Submitted by NickDanger3di t3_xukl1z in Futurology
NickDanger3di OP t1_iqvwnei wrote
>The researchers said that achieving greater than 30 per cent efficiency with the four-terminal tandem device marked “a big step in accelerating the energy transition” and would improve energy security by reducing fossil fuel dependency.
>“This type of solar cell features a highly transparent back contact that allows over 93 per cent of the near infrared light to reach the bottom device,” said Dr Mehrdad Najafi from the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO).
>“This performance was achieved by optimizing all layers of the semi-transparent perovskite solar cells using advanced optical and electrical simulations as a guide for the experimental work in the lab.”
Scissorhands12 t1_iqyofva wrote
Full article
Researchers have passed the 30 per cent efficiency barrier with silicon solar cells for the first time by combining them with the so-called “miracle material” perovskite.
A team from various universities and institutes in the Netherlands made the breakthrough with a tandem solar cell that compliments traditional silicon-based cells – which have an energy conversion efficiency of around 22 per cent – with the widely-acclaimed properties of perovskite.
The researchers said that achieving greater than 30 per cent efficiency with the four-terminal tandem device marked “a big step in accelerating the energy transition” and would improve energy security by reducing fossil fuel dependency.
“This type of solar cell features a highly transparent back contact that allows over 93 per cent of the near infrared light to reach the bottom device,” said Dr Mehrdad Najafi from the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO).
“This performance was achieved by optimizing all layers of the semi-transparent perovskite solar cells using advanced optical and electrical simulations as a guide for the experimental work in the lab.”
Perovskite has been hailed for its potential to transform an array of industries, ranging from ultra-high-speed communications to renewable energy production.
The researchers behind the latest solar cell record now hope to commercialise the technology to achieve a widespread roll-out.
“Now we know the ingredients and are able to control the layers that are needed to reach over 30 per cent efficiency,” said Professor Gianluca Coletti, program manager of Tandem PV.
“Once combined with the scalability expertise and knowledge gathered in the past years to bring material and processes to a large area, we can focus with our industrial partners to bring this technology efficiencies beyond 30 per cent into mass production.”
The results were presented at the World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (WCPEC-8) in Milan.
alexd2040 t1_iqwak57 wrote
Makes me proud to be Dutch
BreakerSwitch t1_iqx66dl wrote
I was born there, but I'm American. Parents didn't go to the trouble of getting me dual citizenship. You wanna hook me up with a work permit? Please?
Programmdude t1_iqxabf6 wrote
My grandparents were Dutch, but my dad joined the navy so no citizenship by descent for me. I'll take a work visa too.
alexd2040 t1_iqxpzwd wrote
Sorry guys I don't have visas to give away. I work in administration at a generic company
moofacemoo t1_ir49wee wrote
I used to be able to work there but the idiots in my country took that option away. As you can see, it's worked out just brilliantly since.
dontbend t1_iqxcx0u wrote
Why, do you think he's the only one researching perovskite solar cells..? So tired of this obsession with proving ourselves and superficial ego-stroking.
Edit: I have to remind myself of the age of the average (Dutch) redittor...
[deleted] t1_iqxpqox wrote
[removed]
phitfacility t1_iqx6bhg wrote
For comparison sake, 'efficient' ICE are at 33% and some change
jdmetz t1_iqy2vcq wrote
I don't understand - are you comparing the efficiency of solar cells at converting sunlight into electricity to the efficiency of an ICE at converting hydrocarbons to mechanical motion? Aren't those completely different types of processes with no relation to each other?
teddy78 t1_iqy4lfb wrote
Agreed. It’s a total apple to oranges comparison.
treletraj t1_iqyh99x wrote
Ima Apples to Mangos guy myself.
IActuallyMadeThatUp t1_iqywnyk wrote
Classy fella
TreTrepidation t1_iqz0fyh wrote
More like apples to the internal combustion engine.
GarugasRevenge t1_iqyxl9o wrote
You can convert W | VA to HP although there is a multiplier. I don't understand the comparison much either, as solar beats ICE in carbon footprint every time.
Wisdom_like_science t1_iqzkvxt wrote
Probably because solar power is energy return over 20-25 years, while oil wells front load their energy return giving ~50% in the first year of operation.
So you are correct they aren't really comparable...which is a real problem for energy security and the viability of solar in EROI terms.
IcerizeDN t1_iqysxzw wrote
Yeah but you can still compare them.
Andy802 t1_iqz27jf wrote
More like apples to rocks. Sometimes they are both roundish.
Kruzat t1_iqy8vov wrote
Yah, this is easily one of the dumbest comments I've seen on this sub. That and the person that said to ban EVs.
ElectrikDonuts t1_iqxeb85 wrote
And EVs are around 80%-90%
phitfacility t1_iqxg2ib wrote
The missing key now is making those motors and batteries without ransacking thousands of tons of earth for ounces of material that need further refinement. Then comes shipping 87k times to make a final product.
a9dnsn t1_iqxgi6b wrote
I would say the key is building extensive electric based public transportation like buses and trains so most of those cars never need to be built. But good luck convincing the US to do that anywhere at least. Everyone wants their own car.
TheLastSamurai t1_iqxquko wrote
Exactly, the car industry is pulling the wool over all of our eyes, they don’t want public transportation to scale up
ElectrikDonuts t1_iqxhlk4 wrote
Yeah, that is a 100 yr problem. Our generation likely wont see the Us having transit like Switzerland and japan have now. EVs will be fixed over the next 20 years. Eventually we will have fusion and mass transit, hopefully
Puubuu t1_iqxj53k wrote
To be fair, i don't really want to commute in those japanese trains where the last few people had to be pushed in...
hhhhhjhhh14 t1_iqxnbjn wrote
We're so far away from overcrowded trains in all but one city that it shouldn't be a concern whatsoever
ShadowDV t1_iqy32qe wrote
the Chicago Red line has entered the chat
ShadowDV t1_iqy2jvl wrote
Public transportation doesn’t magically solve the problem. I live in the downtown of a midsized city, and the nearest grocery store is 5 miles away. Nearest hardware store 4 miles. In fact most of the business I frequent are between 4 and 10 miles away. I’m not walking to the bus stop, waiting for the bus, going 5 miles, turning a 10 minute drive into a 25 minute ride, getting several bags of groceries, and then waiting outside in the snow for the next 20 minutes for the next bus to come.
Now, I’ve lived in Chicago without a car, so I’m not against the idea in principle. But all the businesses I needed on a daily basis were available within a 15 minute walk from where I lived, and an EL stop was 10 minutes away. This is all possible because the population density is high enough to support businesses clustered in walkable neighborhoods.
In most of middle America, the population density is typically not high enough in an area to support these types of walkable communities. So everything is spread out, designed for communities with POVs.
It would take a massive redesign and rebuilding of communities for the public transportation thing to be viable.
[deleted] t1_iqzezgh wrote
[removed]
JaxRhapsody t1_iqzeawe wrote
I don't wanna rely on public transportation. I wanna get in my car, blast my music, do and go where I want at my own liesure or urgency, not worry about schedules, other people and other public trans bullshit. I don't currently have a car, and I still refuse to get on a bus. I hop on my bike, crank up the headphones, or BT speaker, and do all that other stuff. I don't like living on a bike either, but it's still better than some bus, or tram. But yeah, I'm all for better public trans if more people use it, and it doesn't inconvenience the rest of us, who don't use it.
Diablojota t1_iqy28f3 wrote
We lack the population density that other countries have. For general scale, Germany is a bit bigger (land size) than the state of Georgia. Georgia has around 11 million people. Germany has 85 million. It’s extremely difficult to build cost effective infrastructure that doesn’t bankrupt a municipality because not enough people use it to cover the costs.
It’s far easier to convert people to purchasing EVs or some alternative fuel vehicle.
AdministrativePage7 t1_iqzaagd wrote
Fyi Germany is roughly double the area of GA
Diablojota t1_ir0bhn9 wrote
Even at double, the population density still holds. GA doubled would be 22 million vs 85 million. I could have chosen Montana, which is slightly larger than Germany. They have just over 1 million inhabitants.
AdministrativePage7 t1_ir3x4yw wrote
Yeah your point still stands for sure, just wanted to throw it out there
I187urpuppiez t1_iqyjip1 wrote
And what about my weekend car?
KeppraKid t1_iqz9gpc wrote
I'd like to see a strong public transit backbone with some cars thrown in that are owned by the government that are electric self-driving that you can use using a public credit system wherein you get free uses up to a point and then have to pay and then hard locked.
ElectrikDonuts t1_iqxhfs6 wrote
Shouldnt be a problem considering it takes 20,000 lbs of gas to get a 30 mpg vehicle to 100,000 miles and we have relatively no issue finding that material. Material prices on EV batteries could 4x and auto cost on new EVs would be affected less than gas swinging 10% on any ICE
Reducing material consumption by 10s of thousands of lbs should be easier than you think. Especially considering that material can be recaptured, repurposed, and recycled in the future. Unlike oil and gas
the_real_abraham t1_iqxutrh wrote
The problem with using fossil fuels isn't just the combustion. It's also spreading petroleum products and by-products over millions of miles of roadways. Lithium production keeps improving. Batteries and storage keep improving. As far a pollution goes, I find the tire particles we're all currently breathing a more pressing issue.
paulwesterberg t1_iqy62yu wrote
I would like to point out that in addition to reducing air pollution due to fuel burning EVs also reduce pollution due to braking because they can use regen to recapture energy rather than wasting it with friction brakes.
skyfishgoo t1_iqyb35u wrote
you mean like we do for oil and uranium.
phitfacility t1_iqycqid wrote
We do it all for the resources, there's a huge bounty waiting between Mars Jupiter ⛏️
mr_bedbugs t1_iqyfdo5 wrote
Ransack the Moon!
phitfacility t1_iqyh5nc wrote
That's a whole lotta h3 man, lol
Yeti-Rampage t1_iqy0hjj wrote
Different metric - solar energy efficiency means you’re capturing X% of solar radiation, which is both massive and free.
EV efficiency means you’re converting X% of input electricity to power. The input electricity comes from power plants, and is costly.
I always caution against comparing solar cell efficiency to other technologies.
FYI Solar cell efficiency hits theoretical limits around low-30% for single junction, maybe 50% or so for dual junction. World record is a 3-junction around 39% I think from the company Solar Junction.
ElectrikDonuts t1_iqy1xza wrote
Im comparing the EV to the ICE comment
Yeti-Rampage t1_iqy3xbe wrote
I think I figured out the confusion - ICE can mean “internal conversion efficiency” in the context of a solar cell (and in fact 33% is a good number for 2-junction solar conversion efficiency).
But the comment above was about “internal combustion engine” (also abbreviated ICE).
Hence your EV comparison makes sense.
Apologies for the misunderstanding!
Kruzat t1_iqy8xp3 wrote
Explain how this is relevant, please
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments