Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday April 30 2018, @04:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the light-work dept.

Electronicsweekly.com reports

Researchers at the University of Michigan have found a way to stack solution-processed organic solar cells on top of vacuum-processed cells, creating an tandem solar cell with 15% efficiency.

"For the last couple of years, efficiency for organic photo-voltaics was stuck around 11 to 12%," said Michigan physicist Xiaozhou Che.

The top solution-processed non-fullerene-acceptor cell absorbs infra-red up to 950nm, and the bottom fullerene-based cell absorbs visible light starting at 350nm.

"By themselves, the cells achieve 10 to 11% efficiency. When we stack them together, we increase light absorption and efficiency improves to 15% with an anti-reflection coating," said Che [...]

High fabrication yield organic tandem photovoltaics combining vacuum- and solution-processed subcells with 15% efficiency (DOI: 10.1038/s41560-018-0134-z) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by FakeBeldin on Monday April 30 2018, @08:05AM (3 children)

    by FakeBeldin (3360) on Monday April 30 2018, @08:05AM (#673637) Journal

    Exactly, I was also missing context on these numbers. From wiki [sigcomm.org]
    - Single p-n junction crystalline silicon: approaching 33.16% (theoretical limit)
    - Lab result for silicon: 25.6%
    - Lab result for 4 junction (GaInP/GaAs/GaInAsP/GaInAs): 46.1%
    - Lab result for epitaxial waver cells: >20%
    - Lab result for 3-junction: 30.2%

    Or, see this graph [wikimedia.org].
    Nutshell: It's an emerging tech, far behind older tech in terms of efficiency.
    Someone else is welcome to summarise what your current solar panel is actually achieving, these are all lab results.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Monday April 30 2018, @10:14AM (2 children)

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Monday April 30 2018, @10:14AM (#673657) Journal

    Sorry, no experience figures (I don't own solar cells), but according to this link: [energysage.com]

    The most efficient commercially available solar panels on the market today have efficiency ratings as high as 22.5%, whereas the majority of panels range from 15% to 17% efficiency rating.

    So those experimental cells are at the lower end of the efficiency range of typical commercially available solar panels.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday April 30 2018, @10:53AM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 30 2018, @10:53AM (#673664) Journal

      So those experimental cells are at the lower end of the efficiency range of typical commercially available solar panels.

      True, but the organic PV are much cheaper/affordable l. Now, if they reach a decent efficiency (and perhaps let life duration), they could be another solution available in the mix.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30 2018, @01:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30 2018, @01:35PM (#673715)

        The press release [brightsurf.com] says the advantages of organic solar cells are that they're flexible and that they're cheap to manufacture.

        At 15 percent efficiency and given a 20-year lifetime, researchers estimate organic solar cells could produce electricity at a cost of less than 7 cents per kilowatt-hour. In comparison, the average cost of electricity in the U.S. was 10.5 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2017, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.