Etching a Simple Pattern on Solar Panels Boosts Light Absorption by 125%, Study Shows
In a new study, a team of scientists from the UK, Portugal, and Brazil discovered that etching a shallow pattern of grating lines in a checkerboard design on solar cells can enhance the current generated by crystalline silicon (c-Si) by as much as 125 percent.
"We found a simple trick for boosting the absorption of slim solar cells," explains photovoltaics researcher Christian Schuster from the University of York.
"Our investigations show that our idea actually rivals the absorption enhancement of more sophisticated designs – while also absorbing more light deep in the plane and less light near the surface structure itself."
According to the authors of the study, "This design offers potential to further integrate solar cells into thinner, flexible materials and therefore create more opportunity to use solar power in more products."
Journal Reference:
Kezheng Li, Sirazul Haque, Augusto Martins, et al. Light trapping in solar cells: simple design rules to maximize absorption [open], Optica (DOI: 10.1364/OPTICA.394885)
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @02:44AM (11 children)
Quote from technical body of article:
"The results suggested the checkerboard with randomised rotations of its repeating units generates more current than any of the competing cells, and generates about 125 percent as much as a conventional solar cell without a grating line design."
Different quote from click-bate part of article:
"to more than double the amount of light captured by conventional solar cells."
I'm pretty sure the the actual increase is 25%, resulting in 125% of previous values and the intro to the article and the summery provided are misleading/wrong.
I dream of a world where we have learned to compare numbers correctly.
(Score: 2) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Sunday October 18 2020, @03:23AM (3 children)
Journalists went to journalism school, not mathiness school. They never learned how to do percentaging.
Cut them a break: at least they didn't go to art school.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @11:01AM (1 child)
FTFY Nobody asked them to report on science.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @06:48PM
Agreed. The journalists on CNN and most of the networks should be cut also. I want someone that at least has some science, math, and/or engineering background to be a journalist. The network owners and executives should also have such backgrounds. None of these MBAs. I do not give 'journalists' without such backgrounds that much credit. They tend to be pathetically stupid, they tend to think way too highly of themselves, and they tend to spend pages explaining something that could have been explained in one paragraph. Then they blame infringement, Google, and big tech for everything and they want the government to 'fix' it by making IP laws even worse than they already are. It's not journalism it's propaganda.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 20 2020, @02:48PM
They should have dealt with percentages starting from middle school at the latest, and that's if they were in remedial courses. Illiteracy and innumeracy are at the lowest rates they've ever been, but are still shockingly high, something like 25% in the US.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @03:45AM (1 child)
Thanks for checking out the actual article. I was wondering about that myself since a 125% increase seemed breathlessly over stated for simply etching a pattern on the glass.
It's still an impressive improvement, but this sort of thing bugs the crap out of me.
Journalists love reporting the big numbers. They'll write articles that have phrases such as "Product X doubles your chances of getting cancer!" They never put in actual numbers where the details reads "Product X users had 0.004% incidence of cancer compared to the control group's 0.002%." Nobody's going to worry about a cancer increase that has less real-life odds than being killed falling in the bathtub, but tell them it DOUBLES their risk and suddenly people lose their minds.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @05:44AM
When you make the perfect solar panel, it can absorb the same photon twice.
(Score: 3, Informative) by EvilSS on Sunday October 18 2020, @04:35AM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday October 18 2020, @11:03AM
Open access, can be read in full.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @07:00PM
From the OP
"can enhance the current generated by crystalline silicon (c-Si) by as much as 125 percent."
Your quote
"According to the paper, it is an increase in bulk current in the cell from 10.1 to 22.7 mA/cm^2."
The question to always ask when it comes to these is that it increases the current by 125 percent when compared to what? Compared to their cherry picked alternative? Or compared to what else is generally in use for whatever situation this is supposed to be used for instead?
What's the control group and is the control group being cherry picked to exaggerate the headline?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @04:30PM
According to the paper, it is an increase in bulk current in the cell from 10.1 to 22.7 mA/cm^2.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday October 19 2020, @07:44AM
"The researchers acknowledge that their modelled results might deliver somewhat less impressively in the real world [...]"
Are you even really sure any etching of anything, or measurements of any currents, ever took place?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Funny) by oumuamua on Sunday October 18 2020, @01:49PM (3 children)
This One Weird Trick Doubles Your Solar Cell Output!
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Sunday October 18 2020, @03:39PM
Hah! I was thinking about submitting that for the dept. At least i wasn't the only one that read it that way :-)
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @04:43PM (1 child)
Until dead leaves and biological junk fill up the beautifully etched surface.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 19 2020, @01:22AM
yeah. better mount them etched ones where a pressure washer can reach them ...?
also, what does this "say" on matter of "light"? i mean it's still the same photons and all: no de/increase of frequency -or- intensity. so what changed?
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Sunday October 18 2020, @02:41PM (2 children)
Sooo, I wonder how many percents they win if they etch a shallow pattern of grating lines in the shape of that goatse guy...
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Sunday October 18 2020, @03:40PM (1 child)
A ..uhhh.. 'boat'-load.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 18 2020, @10:19PM
> A ..uhhh.. 'buyt'-load.
fixed?